Sunday Thought for October 13, 2013

I thought I'd better get this out early since this weekend is going to be hectic for me and I wouldn't want to miss my Sunday post.  Luckily, the ULC Newsletter came out with a reprint of an article posted in Science & Technology called, Texas Wrangles Over Evolution and Creationism.  As one would expect, I have my own view on this argument, but let's take a look at an excerpt from the post that sums up what they were saying:

 

Giving students a chance to “make up their own minds” is a favorite argument of creationists, but it has flaws. First, if students should be encouraged to weigh creationism with evolution, why should they not also be encouraged to weigh alchemy with chemistry? Second, scientists are not trying to deny students a creationist education, because creationism can be taught in any Sunday school classroom. Third, in a public school science classroom, students are expected to weigh scientific theories with each other, and creationism is not a testable scientific theory.

Encouraging children to think for themselves is exactly what we are doing by reserving public schools for science instruction and churches for religious instruction. Unfortunately, the Texas SBOE does not see how church-state separation achieves this.

  First of all I have to state that I don't believe in creationism as taught in the Bible.  I think it may have some basis in truth, however, if we accept that our gene pool was tampered with, "as ancient alien theorist believe."  Otherwise, we have to accept that humans would have had to suffer through millions of years of evolution to get where we are.  Was God the one doing the tampering?  Very possibly, in which case wouldn't this present an argument that both sides are right?

Let's look at the excerpt above.  "Giving students a chance to “make up their own minds” is a favorite argument of creationists, but it has flaws."   No it doesn't.  Everyone should have the chance to make up their own minds.  This process is what keeps us searching for the truth.  If we only believe one side of an argument, how exciting would that be?

"First, if students should be encouraged to weigh creationism with evolution, why should they not also be encouraged to weigh alchemy with chemistry?"  They should absolutely be encouraged to weigh everything in life!  This is the basis of education and real learning, something our educational system is sorely lacking.

"Scientists are not trying to deny students a creationist education, because creationism can be taught in any Sunday school classroom."  Why teach them separately?  What we're doing is preventing those that do not have a robust religious or spiritual life from having the benefit of creative discussion on an opposing point of view.  How will they be able to intelligently address the issue if they don't have the opportunity for knowledge?  Both views should be taught as a combined subject with no slant to either viewpoint, other than in the context of debate.

"In a public school science classroom, students are expected to weigh scientific theories with each other, and creationism is not a testable scientific theory."  Hmmm...theoretical physics,  medical science, engineering.  That can't be done.  There is no scientific proof.  If medicine is an exact science then, why do we practice it so much and still not cure the common cold?  Most knowledge started as theory until someone proved the hypothesis, until someone asked the question, "Why?"  Scientists that don't accept, at least the possibility, that our genes were tampered with will feel pretty stupid if we find out its true.  Nothing is ever absolute, and the scientist that closes their mind to any possibility is a fool.  Just because something isn't testable, doesn't give it any less possible validity.

"Encouraging children to think for themselves is exactly what we are doing by reserving public schools for science instruction and churches for religious instruction."  Again, although I agree totally with the separation of church and state, offer this comparison course as an elective class, not as required study.  If a student wants a rounded education, they have an opportunity to get one.  If they choose to enter university without a set of tools to form intelligent discussion and debate, that is also their right.

I was fortunate in that my education allowed me to see both side of the discussion.  Although I side with the evolutionists, I see the possibility for genetic manipulation which may have kick started the human species and, even though not yet provable, we may be on the verge of a philosophical shift in the way we view human evolution.  I don't know, and neither do the scientists.  The difference is, I look forward to finding out, one way or the other.

What is your view?  As always, feel free to comment below or send an email to the address above.

Have a blessed Sunday!