Today's blog actually comes from a paper I am writing for class. It's a bit lengthy, but I think it's pretty good. Thanks for reading! Please respond if you have something you want to say!
I
recently read the article by Claudia Wallis entitled “Evolution Wars.” In this article, Wallis explores the teaching
of macroevolution and intelligent design in schools and the movement behind
these viewpoints. I found this article
to be only mildly informative as to the events surrounding the intelligent
design/macroevolution controversy. I
also found it to be much in favor of the evolutionists’ point-of-view. The relevant debate, however, seems not to
depend upon one’s definition of the origins of man, but rather upon the purpose
of the public educational system.
The Article
Wallis’
article presents readers with the arguments of both the Darwinist viewpoint and
the viewpoint of those who advocate intelligent design. She then explores the methods the intelligent
design community has used to further their cause and lessen the foothold of
evolutionistic teaching as well as the response of the evolutionist
community. The quotes chosen to be used,
questionable historicity, and language used in this article make it very much
slanted towards the view of the evolutionists.
First,
the quotes Wallis chose to use in this article, as well as the format she
choose to use in presenting them, were used strategically in a manner that
conveyed that all those arguments presented by the intelligent design community
have been easily accounted for and answered by the Darwinist community. This is simply not a matter of fact. The work of not only the intelligent design
community, but as well as many other anti-natural selection scientists, has
posed major question regarding the origins of man. Questions such as the “fine-tuning” of the
universe as well as the lack of explanation for the energy in the universe have
remained unanswered since they were posed.
Wallis’
article also contains some convenient twists on historical facts. The main error she makes here is that of
omission, though it seems likely this was done deliberately. At the mention of the Scopes trial (p. 28),
she states that, “Tennessee famously banned the teaching of evolution and
convicted school-teacher John Scopes of violating that ban in the ‘monkey
trial’ of 1925.” While these are all
factual, they present Scopes as the helpless victim of government
enforcement. The reality is that Scopes
was coerced into using the banned book by a set of individuals desiring to
debate the law. Scopes knew exactly what
he was getting into and ultimately faced no punishment for his trial, though he
faced a guilty judgment. The arduous
trial was used mainly as a weapon against the religious establishment; a weapon
that would prove to be quite effective, especially when paired with the
comically inaccurate, yet well-respected play, Inherit the Wind.
The
third problem with the article was that the very language used to describe
either side of the debate made the intelligent design community out to be
little more than right-wing radicals bent on ruining the day of scientific
fact. She hints at Behe being extreme
with the inclusion of irrelevant facts in his description. She boils down the intelligent design
community as nothing more than “anti-Darwin” in several places. Wallis goes along with the Darwinist-endorsed
opinion that intelligent design is “unscientific,” classifying it as such later
in the article. Also often are the
themes of the religious community being the big, bad, dogmatic wolf, forcing
people into their will. I find this
especially ironic, as the scientific community gains its apparent unified
viewpoint regarding the origins of man because of its extreme dogma on the
topic. These failings on the part of the
writer impose a substantial amount of weakness to any amount of argument she
might have attempted to make, but her question regarding what should be taught
in schools is a very relevant thought in today’s culture.
The Problem
The
educational system of the United States has evolved into a large and very
important part of our society as it has in all the world. Individuals are not only legally required to
attend school, they are practically required to out the absolute necessity of
education in our culture. One who
desires to do more than work in the fast-food industry, or other such undesirable
jobs, must at least complete secondary education. As most students in America attend
publicly-funded schools, they also play a large role in the political situation
of the U.S. Thus the rise of the
evolution vs. intelligent design debate was no surprise as concerned parents
wanted to ensure their children were not being brainwashed into a certain
manner of thinking. Their concern is a
worthy one, but the reasoning for “teaching the controversy” goes far beyond
simple religious freedom.
Back
in the humble beginnings of this great nation, the public school system was
started as a means of teaching children how to read their Bibles. I state this not as some ill-fated argument
that the U.S. is a so-called “Christian nation,” but rather to discover the
purpose of the educational system. Back
in those times, the ability to read the Bible was an important part of
life. So much so that the people decided
it would be worth their money to pay someone else to educate their children in
literacy. Today, our schools teach more
than simple English, but math, science, music, physical education, crafting,
foreign languages, as well as a large amount of other courses. What is the purpose of all this, though? Many students often complain about seemingly
frivolous classes (mainly math classes) that they will “never use in life” and,
for the most part, they are correct. So
why is the educational system so vast? I
would argue that the purpose of the educational system’s vastness can be
described in four different areas.
1.
Communication
One of the
educational department’s main goals is to ensure the ability of citizens to
communicate efficiently amongst one another.
Communication is vital to anyone who wants to be a part of the world on
any level.
2.
Life Skills
Schools work to
also develop skills, such as arithmetic, that are important for every field of
work. Schools also work to help develop
students’ interests and shape them into a career. Also, those “pointless” classes work to
enable students to acquire new skills in life even after they have completed
their education.
3.
Inter-Personal and
Intra-Personal Skills
Public education
works to ensure individuals are able to work in a community, as is required in
almost every occupation available.
4.
Critical Thinking
Finally, schools
work to develop the ability of students to think critically about the issues
that surround them. The ability to think
critically is vital to the informed voter, worker, and citizen of a nation.
It is because of
this last skill development that I believe the ability to “teach the
controversy” in schools is extremely important.
As one of those topics that will seemingly never be resolved, it is
important for students to be able to consider the facts for themselves and
decide what is right. Should we choose
to simply teach one way or another we would be depriving them of this
opportunity to become critical thinkers.
This means I
advocate the teaching of macroevolution in schools. Even as a Christian. Though I am a decided young earth creationist,
I also have an understanding that there are a lot of theories regarding how God
created the universe. Evolution
coincides with some of them. But just
because I disagree with something does not mean that it should be stricken from
the school curriculum.
In conclusion, I
think it is important for the U.S. educational system to be able to provide
students with the ability to think critically and that means teaching about the
existence of alternative views of the origins of man and the weaknesses of the
commonly accepted scientific model, macroevolution. If we fail to do this, we are training our next
generation to fail.
No comments:
Post a Comment