Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
The atheist and the creationist: Can't they just get along?
salon.com — My friend is considering teaching "young earth" creationism in his school, and I think I'm going to vomit.
jhodapp- 4 diggs
- digg it
- jhodapp, on 05/15/2008, -2/+3Fantastic response. I believe that the author is correct in that diversity of belief, no matter how right or wrong, is the goal. Freedom doesn't mean that all things are tolerable except for one or two *wacky* ideas. It means all are equal and it's up to individuals to figure out the validity of a belief for themselves. It's not the role of anybody else external to an individual, ever.
- meuserj, on 05/15/2008, -0/+5First of all.. since the school in question is a private school, many of the typical arguments of teaching a religious viewpoint from a taxpayer funded institution do not apply. There is no constitutionality debate here. However the more philosophical issue raised is one that I could not disagree with more fervently.
To say that in a science classroom, diversity of opinion should be held above scientifically derived evidence is ludicrous. Science doesn't work through belief or feelings, it works through hard evidence and the method to extract it. You can believe with every fiber of your being that Pi is 3, but to teach it as a fact to students who are just learning how to calculate the circumference of a circle is incredibly damaging.
If belief is held above evidence, should we teach alchemy along side chemistry, astrology along side astronomy, or phrenology along side neuroscience? If more opinion diversity is better, which creation myth should be taught along side evolution? Every culture has one, so should we teach them all? As fact?
Not all beliefs are equally valid, regardless of the number of adherents. And young people's lives are not enriched by being told to believe something which has mountains of objective evidence against it.
Some people believe that the earth is flat, should it be taught? Some people believe that we never went to the moon. Some people believe we are living inside a hollow earth. Some people believe that earth is the center of the universe. Some people believe that aliens in UFO's abduct people at night. Some people believe that man has never gone to the moon. Some people believe that the HIV virus doesn't cause AIDS, and that it isn't sexually transmitted. I'm not saying that there isn't room for debate about any of these opinions, but to teach any of these things as an absolute fact in a high school science classroom is immoral.- jhodapp, on 05/15/2008, -3/+3Sure, teaching false things as fact (if something is widely viewed as being a fact but even that can be wrong) is immoral. But it's the value judgment issue that I take to heart here. Who decides what is fact? One could make an argument that the whole concept of being a *fact* is a highly subjective thing. What is fact, how do we know something exists? It could all be a figment of our imaginations, or it might not exist at all. How do you know you exist? Fact can be just as indefinite as opinion. But now this is just semantics, I'm not much for this type of debate.
The point of the editor's reply was to point out that the original person who got angry over his friend teaching creation science as fact was just that, he got angry. Why should he be angry instead of unemotionally helping his friend see the facts that he views as very self-evident? The editor also made the point that many many cultures teach things that turn out to be false that were held as fact. I say that if someone is intentionally misleading, as in pre-meditated, that might be considered immoral. But that's a tough thing to prove. I say falter on the side of personal liberty to teach whatever anybody wants. That way, it will be left up to the individual to decide. Maybe a child taught something false will believe in something erroneous for several years. But then when they are mature enough in their mind to truly think, they'll have the opportunity to decide for themselves whether something is true or false. This is much better than one *factual* idea being shoved down an entire population's throats when in actuality that *fact* might be shown to be false in the future by science...it happens all the time!- meuserj, on 05/15/2008, -0/+6In my response, I never said anything should be taught as fact.. look carefully. I understand that science changes, and it always will. That is the power of science, not a flaw of it. It changes as more evidence is gathered. Every belief I listed is held despite evidence, and is unchanging.
Scientific subjects should be taught in the context of "this is what scientists believe right now, and here is the evidence to support it." Nothing, not even science, should ever be taught as absolute fact. New theories will always expand and replace old theories. The problem with teaching any of the beliefs I listed is that they must be held in the face of contrary evidence because they are inflexible, new evidence must be ignored or explained around.
Saying that evidence based science is no more valid than pseudoscientific belief because science changes as new evidence is discovered is missing the point completely. Also, saying that children can come to their own conclusions when they mature is ignoring the fact that belief that is imposed on children when they are learning how the world works is very seldom changed at maturity, so the damage is already done. (Yes Jim, I realize that I am an example that goes against this.)
Once again I want to make it clear that I am not arguing for governmental intervention here. Private schools and parents can teach whatever insane pseudoscientific nonsense they want to children. I believe it is absolutely immoral though, because they are impeding the intellectual development of their children. It's their right as American citizens, but I personally believe it is a terrible thing to do.- jhodapp, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2Fair enough. Good reply by the way...healthy unemotional debate is fun. :)
- meuserj, on 05/15/2008, -0/+6In my response, I never said anything should be taught as fact.. look carefully. I understand that science changes, and it always will. That is the power of science, not a flaw of it. It changes as more evidence is gathered. Every belief I listed is held despite evidence, and is unchanging.
- jhodapp, on 05/15/2008, -3/+3Sure, teaching false things as fact (if something is widely viewed as being a fact but even that can be wrong) is immoral. But it's the value judgment issue that I take to heart here. Who decides what is fact? One could make an argument that the whole concept of being a *fact* is a highly subjective thing. What is fact, how do we know something exists? It could all be a figment of our imaginations, or it might not exist at all. How do you know you exist? Fact can be just as indefinite as opinion. But now this is just semantics, I'm not much for this type of debate.
- meuserj, on 05/15/2008, -0/+5First of all.. since the school in question is a private school, many of the typical arguments of teaching a religious viewpoint from a taxpayer funded institution do not apply. There is no constitutionality debate here. However the more philosophical issue raised is one that I could not disagree with more fervently.
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by