stuart@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP (Stuart Kurtz) (06/05/84)
It occurs to me (as I'm sure it has to others before) that if one does present a "balanced" discussion of the theory of evolution vs. the theory of creation, the students will have a marvelous opportunity to learn the nature and esthetics of science. Most currently accepted scientific theories gained their acceptance because they were better able than their competitors to explain the phenomena of interest, and more useful in predicting new phenomena. Unfortunately, science *education* typically omits this paradigmatic example of "natural selection". In fact, science *education* often consists of little more than a recitation of the prevailing models, with no discussion as to how those models came to prevail. I would claim that science does not reside in the theories or models, but rather the criteria for distinguishing among them. There seems to be tremendous concern amongst the scientific community that state mandated teaching of creation will ultimately weaken science. I suspect that the one reason the theory of creation has hung around so long is that those biblical literalists who support it feel that it is a suppressed theory. [Suppressed by us godless, intellectual, pinko, etc.'s, no less!] The evidence for distinguishing between evolution vs. creation is good. Let's have confidence in that evidence. I doubt we will ever rid ourselves of creation "science" as long as its proponents can claim they are not receiving a fair hearing. We know we can savage their theory; LET'S DO IT, IN PUBLIC, IN THE SCHOOLS!!! In three years they'll be back crying in the legislatures asking us to leave their cherished myths die in peace. And in the mean time, we might teach a generation what science really is, and restore its excitement and wonder. ---------------------------------------- Stuart Kurtz : The Department of Computer Science ihnp4!gargoyle!stuart : The University of Chicago