Should Creationism be taught alongside Evolution?

Dexter · Fri Nov 25, 2011 9:10 pm

If I was a biology teacher, I'd be tempted to "teach" creationism with some not-so-subtle ridicule

hey_you · Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:04 pm


	Dexter wrote: If I was a biology teacher, I'd be tempted to "teach" creationism with some not-so-subtle ridicule

I can see why you would, Dexter. But keep in mind...

A good teacher respects his/her students. Not matter how ignorant, annoying, or ridiculous they are.

DWill · Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:26 pm


	Robert Tulip wrote: How I see it is that creationism is a secondary issue against the primary debate between reason and faith. People within the camp of reason cannot comprehend a faith based world view. But for people of faith, their attitudes start with loyalty to community, in which the Bible is seen as the basis of morality. Leaving aside YECist absurdity, the Bible identifies Adam with the fall from grace, and Jesus with redemption. Paul says that Jesus restored the relationship with God that was destroyed by Adam's sin. What this all means is that if people accept the central Christian idea "Jesus saves", they are committed to belief in Adam as the first man. Without YEC, by this ignorant popular view, there is no heaven, no salvation. no hope and no community.

It really isn't true that YEC is at the basis of the belief you speak of. There are, for one thing, old earth creationists, but apart from that minor difference, this kind of fundamentalism is not typical of all Christians that we might in general label as evangelicals. They don't need YEC to have the biblical moral foundation you describe. It's important to make all the right distinctions rather than to generalize, but we don't see this being done very much on either side of the argument. I'd like to see what you hinted at in the beginning of the post, more sociological sophistication when talking about religion, instead of the broad brush strokes. A little polling data can be a flimsy basis for sweeping conclusions.

Dexter · Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:33 pm

hey_you wrote:


	Dexter wrote: If I was a biology teacher, I'd be tempted to "teach" creationism with some not-so-subtle ridicule

I can see why you would, Dexter. But keep in mind...

A good teacher respects his/her students. Not matter how ignorant, annoying, or ridiculous they are.

Sometimes extreme measures are called for when you're dealing with brainwashed kids. Maybe it's your duty to do what you can to undo the damage, and not worry about offending people.

DWill · Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:37 pm

If there is any chance that students believing evolution is bunk can be led to see it isn't, the teacher would have to avoid anything like obvious ridicule. He might be smart to be sneaky, though.

hey_you · Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:43 pm


	Dexter wrote: Sometimes extreme measures are called for when you're dealing with brainwashed kids. Maybe it's your duty to do what you can to undo the damage, and not worry about offending people.

Do you think ridicule is the best way to deconvert these kids? Maybe there are better choices at going about this task of "undoing the damage." I'd love to hear your ideas.

Also, I think it's absolutely necessary for a teacher to worry about offending people. In fact, it's an essential duty for any educator.

Dexter · Fri Nov 25, 2011 10:59 pm


	hey_you wrote: Do you think ridicule is the best way to deconvert these kids? Maybe there are better choices at going about this task of "undoing the damage." I'd love to hear your ideas. Also, I think it's absolutely necessary for a teacher to worry about offending people. In fact, it's an essential duty for any educator.

I'm not suggesting laughing at a kid, telling him he's an idiot, and then giving him a wedgie.

But if avoiding offending people is really such a priority, you would just avoid any controversial topics. I am suggesting there is nothing wrong with telling people, including kids, that their beliefs are false. None of this wishy-washy stuff about how some people disagree. You are bound to offend some kids, their parents, politicians, etc. -- for job preservation, maybe not a great idea. How to go about that in the most effective way, I don't claim to know.

wilde · Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:06 pm


	justin grimbol wrote: i think it would be fine to teach creationism in school, but ONLY IF taught alongside evolution and the history of ALL other major world religions. that being said, i think that evolution can be tought independently. evolution is a scientific and religious topic, while creationism is only a religious topic.

Maybe it would be more appropriate to include Creationism in a world religions class? After all, every religion has a creation story.

DWill: Agreed. Ridicule will only result in complains from parents, which could be a slippery slope.

hey_you · Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:15 pm


	Dexter wrote: I'm not suggesting laughing at a kid, telling him he's an idiot, and then giving him a wedgie.

LOL


	Dexter wrote: But if avoiding offending people is really such a priority, you would just avoid any controversial topics. I am suggesting there is nothing wrong with telling people, including kids, that their beliefs are false. None of this wishy-washy stuff about how some people disagree. You are bound to offend some kids, their parents, politicians, etc. -- for job preservation, maybe not a great idea. How to go about that in the most effective way, I don't claim to know.

I think it's definitely possible to discuss controversial topics and avoid offending people. It's all in the presentation.

Now, let's say you tell a student "what you believe is false." Will that work? I highly doubt it.

We are more bound to offend kids when we do not take their point-of-view seriously.

hey_you · Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:30 pm


	wilde wrote: Maybe it would be more appropriate to include Creationism in a world religions class? After all, every religion has a creation story.

I took a world religions class in high school. My teacher was Mormon and all he did was talk about his mission. One time, he said prayer was the same thing as meditation.

kelstan · Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:37 pm


	hey_you wrote: I'm not sure if this forum is the right place to post these questions, but I thought it might interest some of you. Last week, a group of students in my class had to do a presentation on why creationism should be taught in public schools. At the end, people went out of control. My teacher finally stepped in and said something along the lines of "I think these institutions (creationists/evolutionists) will continue to clash because each side refuses to include the other. Maybe we could set up two separate paradigms that explain what both of them argue and what they use to support their argument." What do you think of this idea? Should teachers take the time in 10th grade biology classes to analyze Genesis? Do you think it would be effective?

This has been quite effectively discussed here: http://www.venganza.org/about/open-letter/

May the Sauce be with you.

johnson1010 · Sat Nov 26, 2011 12:40 pm

Justin Grimbol:


	Quote: i think it would be fine to teach creationism in school, but ONLY IF taught alongside evolution and the history of ALL other major world religions. that being said, i think that evolution can be tought independently. evolution is a scientific and religious topic, while creationism is only a religious topic

hello Justin, welcome to the boards!

Creationism should definitely be taught in school. Not as a field of study, but as a topic. The same way that other belief systems are discussed. These people are hindu, these people are Shinto historically, these people tend to be Christian, and in each of these groups there are different denominations. Creationism can’t be ignored. It is a real thing and thousands struggle with it still. But you should no more teach people creationism as a field of study than you should teach people palm reading or alchemy.

You teach people ABOUT alchemy. You don’t try to teach them how to DO alchemy. In both cases, “This is what people used to think before they knew any better” applies. It is an important example of sociology, and psychology. Not to be skipped over, or skimmed.

You do have that confused though, Justin. Evolution is not to be lumped in with religions. The study of evolution is not a way to behave. It isn’t a moral directive, or speculation on an afterlife. There are no holidays to observe, no rituals to perform, nor mode of dress. There are no sacraments, no sacred artifacts, effigies, or animals. No basis for judging others, nor conducting one’s self. It posits nothing about anything supernatural.

The study of evolution is just that. It is the categorization, labeling, and attempt to understand the natural processes which shape animal diversity. These processes exist independent of human observation or categorization. They wouldn’t change if they were called something else, or if everyone gave up on it altogether.

A Scientist stating that people are primates isn’t what makes that a fact. A scientist merely reports the findings that, yes, we are empirically primates. It isn’t an argument FOR it. It is a report OF it.

Teaching evolution and creationism side by side isn’t workable. Literally all there is to know of creationism is “god did it” while there are whole libraries of information on exactly how evolution works. One of these is a science, the other is the rejection of knowledge.


	Quote: Hey-you I took a world religions class in high school. My teacher was Mormon and all he did was talk about his mission. One time, he said prayer was the same thing as meditation.

For some people that is what it amounts to. And though others may honestly believe they are communicating with a supernatural, anthropomorphic, magic, wish-granting, intangible, sky-genie, the effects on their bodies would ultimately be similar to the practice of meditation.

Here's a few threadsd about prayer from our community. Check it out.

prayer-vs-magic-t6228.html?hilit= prayer vs magic

prayer-slacktivism-at-its-best-t10142.html?hilit= prayer magic

justin grimbol · Sat Nov 26, 2011 3:03 pm

i agree with most of what you said. but i think understanding ourselves and our history is important part of religion. it also helps a person be humble. an understanding and a respect for science keeps a religious person from becoming crazed born-again fundamentalist.

hey_you · Sat Nov 26, 2011 5:08 pm


	johnson1010 wrote: For some people that is what it amounts to. And though others may honestly believe they are communicating with a supernatural, anthropomorphic, magic, wish-granting, intangible, sky-genie, the effects on their bodies would ultimately be similar to the practice of meditation.

But meditation is all about clearing your mind of thoughts. Prayer is exactly the opposite. The "effects on their bodies" would be similar to a drug high. Meditation has a completely different impact. Your mind slows down dramatically and is free from desire. I get what you're saying though. I can understand why some people think it's the same thing.

Forum rules

Should Creationism be taught alongside Evolution? Tweet This Topic

Who is online

Chat Room Always Open!