Should Evolution Be Taught In Public Schools?

[Vincent Vega]

Hello everyone,
Came across this interesting article about a teacher at my school (!!) in the NY Times, and his struggle with teaching evolution.
He is a supporter of evolutions and a faithful Anglican.

Discuss.


[url="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/education/24evolution.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp"]http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/educatio...amp;_r=1&hp[/url]

[Hassan]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' post='1641976' date='Aug 29 2008, 09:51 PM']Hello everyone,
Came across this interesting article about a teacher at my school (!!) in the NY Times, and his struggle with teaching evolution.
He is a supporter of evolutions and a faithful Anglican.

Discuss.


[url="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/education/24evolution.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp"]http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/educatio...amp;_r=1&hp[/url][/quote]

Yes. That this question could even be asked stuns me to be honest

[Vincent Vega]

Why does it stun you?

[goldenchild17]

No. Not as scientific fact. Should students be made aware of it and what it entails? Sure, but they should not be led to believe it. No one can make someone believe something or disbelieve it, but teachers should not be putting this on the same pedestal as 1+1

[pan!c139]

They should be aware of the theory because it's part of history, but not as a scientific fact, as goldenchild said.

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1642018' date='Aug 29 2008, 09:34 PM']No. Not as scientific fact. Should students be made aware of it and what it entails? Sure, but they should not be led to believe it. No one can make someone believe something or disbelieve it, but teachers should not be putting this on the same pedestal as 1+1[/quote]
I think you'd be surprised as to the amount of supposed "fact" which has been discovered as false and the comparative amount of "theories" that have been proven so...

[MakeYouThink]

Yes, because people have a right to believe in anything they choose to believe in. As long as it doesn't interfere in the rights of a person to believe in something without ridicule.

Funny, an entire group of high school students having a book that shows where each part of a Biological text books assertions about Evolution might be wrong, and we're a minority! LOL!

Edited August 30, 2008 by MakeYouThink

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' post='1642030' date='Aug 29 2008, 09:39 PM']I think you'd be surprised as to the amount of supposed "fact" which has been discovered as false and the comparative amount of "theories" that have been proven so...[/quote]

I don't know how surprised I would be. But all I'm saying is that something shouldn't be purported to be something that it hasn't been proven to be (i.e. Evolution as a scientific fact)

[Vincent Vega]

[quote name='goldenchild17' post='1642047' date='Aug 29 2008, 10:45 PM']I don't know how surprised I would be. But all I'm saying is that something shouldn't be purported to be something that it hasn't been proven to be (i.e. Evolution as a scientific fact)[/quote]
Gravity hasn't been proven to be fact. It, after all, is still the Theory of Gravity.
Should teachers teaching it also let their class know that it's not a "proven fact" when teaching it?

[Hassan]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' post='1642009' date='Aug 29 2008, 09:32 PM']Why does it stun you?[/quote]



The Origin of Species, itself an extraordinarily cogent argument for Darwinism was published in 1859, it is now 2008. Our entire scientific knowledge of biology, pharmaceuticals, and zoology is based on evolution. There is such a plethora of evidence that evolution is absolutely correct that is boggles the mind.
I suppose what stuns me is that, no offense, so many people could be so astonishingly ignorant. It’s not like are live in the backwoods of Vietnam, Americans have such an astonishing amount of information available to them, and they waste it.

[Vincent Vega]

It sometimes puzzles me that people deny it, yes, but I don't know why it would stun you that the question would be posed for discussion's sake.

[Hassan]

[quote name='pan!c139' post='1642026' date='Aug 29 2008, 09:38 PM']They should be aware of the theory because it's part of history, but not as a scientific fact, as goldenchild said.[/quote]

Nothing in science is a "fact" as you seem to be thinking of the term.

[goldenchild17]

[quote name='USAirwaysIHS' post='1642051' date='Aug 29 2008, 09:47 PM']Gravity hasn't been proven to be fact. It, after all, is still the Theory of Gravity.
Should teachers teaching it also let their class know that it's not a "proven fact" when teaching it?[/quote]

I should have clarified. I'm not using the word "theory" in the scientific sense. In the scientific terminology of course a theory holds far more weight than it does in the general sense. A scientific theory is far more authoritative than a theory that I were to come up with. I'm referring to evolution as a theory in the latter sense while gravity of course would be a theory in the former sense.

[princessgianna]

the only problem i have with evolution being taught is it is being taught as if it were a law and it is a THEORY!
There are several holes still like if we were at one point little dust particles flying in space where did those dust particules come from???
And If we did evolved from monkeys why do we still have monkeys???

Edited August 31, 2008 by princessgianna

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='princessgianna' post='1643118' date='Aug 30 2008, 11:02 PM']the only problem i have with evolution being taught is it is being taught as if it were a law and it is a THEORY!
There are several holes still like if we were at one point little dust particles flying in space where did those dust particules come from???
And If we did evolved from monkeys why do we still have monkeys???[/quote]
Do you even have a functioning understand of what the theory of evolution actually is? No offense, but it sounds like you don't. Kind of silly for you to be making judgments based on your personal ideas rather than scientific evidence.

[Fidei Defensor]

[url="http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/edwards.html"]http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/f...aw/edwards.html[/url]

A law that required Louisiana teachers to teach creationism along with evolution was stricken down as unconstitutional. "The Creationism Act forbids the teaching of the theory of evolution in public schools unless accompanied by instruction in 'creation science.'"

[Fidei Defensor]

Anyone wishing to become educated about what evolution actually is can direct themselves here:

[url="http://evolution.berkeley.edu/"]http://evolution.berkeley.edu/[/url]

[Mr.Cat]

[quote][b]First Vatican Council
Session 3: Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith | Chapter 4[/b]
5. Even though faith is above reason, there can never be any real disagreement between faith and reason, since it is the same God who reveals the mysteries and infuses faith, and who has endowed the human mind with the light of reason.

6. God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever be in opposition to truth. The appearance of this kind of specious contradiction is chiefly due to the fact that either the dogmas of faith are not understood and explained in accordance with the mind of the Church, or unsound views are mistaken for the conclusions of reason.

10. Not only can faith and reason never be at odds with one another but they mutually support each other, for on the one hand right reason established the foundations of the faith and, illuminated by its light, develops the science of divine things; on the other hand, faith delivers reason from errors and protects it and furnishes it with knowledge of many kinds.

11. Hence, so far is the Church from hindering the development of human arts and studies, that in fact she assists and promotes them in many ways. For she is neither ignorant nor contemptuous of the advantages which derive from this source for human life, rather she acknowledges that those things flow from God, the lord of sciences, and, if they are properly used, lead to God by the help of his grace.

12. Nor does the Church forbid these studies to employ, each within its own area, its own proper principles and method: but while she admits this just freedom, she takes particular care that they do not become infected with errors by conflicting with divine teaching, or, by going beyond their proper limits, intrude upon what belongs to faith and engender confusion.
[url="http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/V1.HTM"]http://www.ewtn.com/library/COUNCILS/V1.HTM[/url][/quote][quote][b]Evolution and the Roman Catholic Church[/b]
"On God the Creator, the Vatican Council was very clear. The definitions preceding the "anathema" (as a technical term of Catholic theology, let him be "cut off" or excommunicated, cf. Gal 1:6-9; Titus 3:10-11; Matt 18:15-17) signify an infallible dogma of Catholic faith (De Fide):

On God the creator of all things
1. If anyone denies the one true God, creator and lord of things visible and invisible: let him be anathema.
2, If anyone is so bold as to assert that there exists nothing besides matter: let him be anathema.
3. If anyone says that the substance or essence of God and that of all things are one and the same: let him be anathema.
4. If anyone says that finite things, both corporal and spiritual, or at any rate, spiritual, emanated from the divine substance; or that the divine essence, by the manifestation and evolution of itself becomes all things or, finally, that God is a universal or indefinite being which by self determination establishes the totality of things distinct in genera, species and individuals: let him be anathema.
5. If anyone does not confess that the world and all things which are contained in it, both spiritual and material, were produced, according to their whole substance, out of nothing by God; or holds that God did not create by his will free from all necessity, but as necessarily as he necessarily loves himself; or denies that the world was created for the glory of God: let him be anathema.

According to Catholic theologian Dr. Ludwig Ott in his 1952 treatise Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, it is to be understood that these condemnations are of the errors of modern materialism (that matter is all there is), pantheism (that God is all there is), and ancient pagan and gnostic-manichean dualism (where God is not responsible for the entire created world, since mere "matter" is evil not good, see Ott, page 79)."

"Concerning the doctrine on creation, Ludwig Ott in his Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma (originally published in 1952 in German) identifies the following points as essential beliefs of the Catholic faith ("De Fide"):

All that exists outside God was, in its whole substance, produced out of nothing by God. (De Fide)
1. God was moved by His Goodness to create the world. (De Fide)
2. The world was created for the Glorification of God. (De Fide)
3. The Three Divine Persons are one single, common Principle of the Creation. (De Fide)
4. God created the world free from exterior compulsion and inner necessity. (De Fide)
5. God has created a good world. (De Fide)
6. The world had a beginning in time. (De Fide)
7. God alone created the world. (De Fide)
8. God keeps all created things in existence. (De Fide)
9. God, through His Providence, protects and guides all that He has created. (De Fide)"
[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_and_the_Roman_Catholic_Church"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_and...Catholic_Church[/url][/quote]“[i]Creationism[/i]” or “[i]intelligent design[/i]” should be taught in the social studies rather than the physical sciences. Students may also benefit from learning of different "myths" concerning “creation”, possibly even seeing similarities in such. Seemingly the Church’s current opinion concerning the matter could be described as a “[i]theistic evolution[/i]”, with some reservations such as the first two parents of humanity. Likewise the Church’s definitions on the subject seem to address the doctrinal and moral implications involved, rather than scientific findings.

“[i]Facts are empirical data, objective verifiable observations.[/i]” “[i]A scientific theory is a well supported body of interconnected statements that explains observations and can be used to make testable predictions.[/i]” Evolution could thus be described as “[i]fact[/i]” and “[i]theory[/i]”. Students should be offered a comprehensive and extensive education/study in the matter of evolution, since in the scientific community there is little or no dispute.

In the family and in religious education/formation the importance/role of God in creation should be upheld. Likewise, those relevant definitions of the Church should be presented to those students able to understand. We ought to impart the ability for the student to use “reason” in the light of faith. Since as Catholics we believe that faith and reason cannot contradict for they are from the same God, the same reality, and the same truth.

In regards to reading the Scriptures keeping in mind that it is firstly a Religious Text and not a scientific, historical, or catechetical text, though it may contain attributes of such, but rather in its authority serves to reaffirm the “[i]Deposit of Faith[/i]”. The Scriptures were indeed written by man, but it was specially inspired by God and had the special protection of God sometimes referred is “Biblical Inherency”. An explanation of this I have heard of a writer, the pen used, and the paper. Indeed God is the inspirer and writer of the Scriptures but He did so through man using his perceptions and abilities.

Pope Leo the Thirteenth quoting and commenting on the approach of Saint Augustine to the Sacred Scriptures wrote, “[i]'not to depart from the literal and obvious sense, except only where reason makes it untenable or necessity requires'; a rule to which it is the more necessary to adhere strictly in these times, when the thirst for novelty and unrestrained freedom of thought make the danger of error most real and proximate.[/i]” (Providentissimus Deus | [url="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_18111893_providentissimus-deus_en.html"]http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii...us-deus_en.html[/url] )

Edited August 31, 2008 by Mr.CatholicCat

[Selah]

Yes, I believe it should be taught in school.

[mommas_boy]

[quote name='princessgianna' post='1643118' date='Aug 31 2008, 01:02 AM']the only problem i have with evolution being taught is it is being taught as if it were a law and it is a THEORY![/quote]

As a science educator, one of the major problems that I have with the effectiveness of science education is that people do not know the proper definition of "theory" as employed by scientists:

[quote name='Mr.CatholicCat' post='1643163' date='Aug 31 2008, 03:26 AM'][i]Facts are empirical data, objective verifiable observations.[/i][i]A scientific theory is a well supported body of interconnected statements that explains observations and can be used to make testable predictions.[/i] Evolution could thus be described as [i]fact[/i] and [i]theory[/i]. Students should be offered a comprehensive and extensive education/study in the matter of evolution, since in the scientific community there is little or no dispute.[/quote]

A scientific theory is not a guess or hunch, the way that the term "theory" is used colloquially in daily conversation. It is a "well-supported body of interconnected statements that explains observations and can be used to make testable predictions", as Mr.CatholicCat pointed out above.

[quote name='princessgianna' post='1643118' date='Aug 31 2008, 01:02 AM']There are several holes still like if we were at one point little dust particles flying in space where did those dust particules come from???[/quote]

Another misconception is that evolution describes how life came from non-life. This is abiogenesis. Evolution describes how species came from other already-living species.

What you quote above, "where did those dust particules [sic] come from", is actually a question of cosmogenesis -- how the universe began. The present theory is, of course, The Big Bang, which states that all matter currently in the universe was contained in a sphere the size of a basketball. This, of course, begs the question where this basketball came from, and it is where scientists are currently working to understand. Ultimately, according to St. Thomas Aquinas' arguments, there must have been some Prime Mover to have placed this basketball in existence in the first place. [b]But, the point is, the question that you raised has nothing to do with evolution.[/b]

[quote name='princessgianna' post='1643118' date='Aug 31 2008, 01:02 AM']And If we did evolved from monkeys why do we still have monkeys???[/quote]

We did not evolve from monkeys, but rather apes. More specifically, we didn't evolve from apes as present today, but rather a common ancestor. This ancestor died out, but its descendants are both apes and humans. The ancestor is dead. Apes are the product of evolution themselves, but a separate track of evolution that did not lead to them becoming human.

Hope that this helps!

Blessings,
Kris