Creationism is alive and well in the public school classroom. Is it science? Is it religion? Any view of how we were created requires a bit of faith, in my opinion, so one shouldn’t necessarily trump the other. Evolutionary biology can be taught via empirical evidence quite nicely, but what the media frequently forgets is that evolutionary biology only hints at our origins, it doesn’t explain them fully.
The observables with this branch of science all have been collected over the past hundred and fifty years and force humans to draw conclusions about what the body of evidence means. That’s not a recipe for 100% infallibility.
My biology teacher in high school was a rabid creationist, going far enough to believe that the Earth was scarcely 10,000 years old. I have a hard time believing this based on what I know from benchmarking data (such as radioisotope dating), but creationists even have an answer to that. (Not a good one, but an answer.) He taught his classes from a creationist point of view, but he didn’t skimp on the science. Quite the contrary, we had weekly laboratory exercises, brutal exams on physiology and comparative anatomy, and a two week course in Latin to better understand taxonomy.
My education didn’t really suffer because of this, and I strongly doubt that the origin of life on Earth is truly a necessary bit of knowledge when preparing for the practical acadaemia of college. I don’t even really buy the argument that teaching creationism is promulgating ignorance, provided the things that are deeply rooted in empiricism are taught to the best of an instructor’s ability.
My thoughts: No one really has a definitive answer at this point, so I prefer to keep an open mind.
Have you been to see Expelled? The film expands on the topic you’ve touched on here. I have mixed thoughts emotions regarding the “documentary”, so I’m holding out for the DVD.
http://www.expelledthemovie.com/
It’s just a personal opinion, but I’m not threatened by a creationist (I.D.*) theory being presented (as a theory). In science we open ourselves up to test every option… if only to narrow the field of untenable hypotheses and/or to test our ability to reason. At no time should evolutionary theorists fear or exclude other ideas from review, no matter how strange. These ideas will either be removed from the field by their lack of merit, or will warrant further review (and have the opportunity [gasp-heaven forbid-pun intended] to refine the current leading theory). By fear or vehement exclusion of ideas that are contrary, or not directly supportive of Darwinism, one shows that there is something wrong with current evolutionary theory or one’s understanding of the theory. One who can completely stand with confidence of the unshakable merits of Darwinism need never fear any challenger. “Put your money where your mouth is”… or better yet “Put up or shut up”.
On the other hand…
Logistically speaking, I do not want pure creationism taught in public schools. It is not the business of public educators to indoctrinate children in religious teachings. As in instilling a child’s character, this is the responsibility of parents. Also, discussion of pure creationism must, in fairness, open the floor to the tenets of many, if not all, faiths. That could waste a lot of precious time. Let’s save that class-time for college when one may take a specific course in comparative religions or philosophies. I would not be against school rooms discussing the possibility that I.D. may be a tenable option for explaining shortfalls in Darwinism (so long as the shortfalls of I.D. are also discussed).
I see creationism and Darwinism as two opposing faith systems… Neither one has direct evidence, neither one is observable, and neither one is repeatable. Unquestioning belief that does not require proof or evidence is the definition of faith.
* Intelligent Design… I make a distinction between pure creationism and intelligent design. Creationism says “G-d created life” while I.D. says “Darwinism fails to answer all of the questions concerning the origins of life”.
One of the issues I have with the teaching of Evolution is that every child takes it for fact even when dictated as theory. Creation might help offer an alternative that keeps our children from being steeped in blind acceptance rather than analytical observance.
Any theory offered with no counter is going to be accepted by the youth as fact if only so they can log the information as “closed book” so that they can get on with the rest of their homework.