As I recently mentioned [TAOMPH219], a rural public school in California tried to offer intelligent design in the proper context: an elective philosophy course. Unfortunately, the teacher who created the class decided to run it more like a Sunday school – and I mean a fundamentalist Christian Sunday school – than a proper philosophy course. In response to this rather blatant violation of whole “First Amendment” thing, a group of parents sued the school, represented by the same group that acted as one of the plaintiffs in the Dover case.
As of today, “the case has been settled and the course has been cancelled”:http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/news/2006/CA/642_settlement_in_emhurst_v_new_1_17_2006.asp. What I found most concerning is that the quote used in the above story from a student in El Tejon reflects the very ignorance that education is supposed to correct. The Earth was not created in six days, but formed over millions of years from “star stuff” – heavy elements forged in the hearts of stars, themselves billions of years old. Geological layers, carbon and radioisotope dating, and astronomical observations all provide a robust body of evidence that forces us to set aside strict Biblical literalism. If anything, the wonderful book of Nature teaches us that we must seek a deeper reading of the Bible. If God’s word lies in the Bible and God’s work lies in Nature, then there must be no contradiction. We must be deep beings, if we are to appreciate the depth of the universe.
The last thought I had about this whole episode concerns educational conservatism. The Christian Right and conservatives seem to go hand-in-hand these days, though I would argue that strict conservatism flies in the face of this particular fundamentalism Christian issue. If we are to give our children the best education, that requires progressive methods but a conservative body of lessons. It is educationally conservative to teach from a wide body of knowledge, to best prepare the students for all schools of thought. It is irresponsible, and unconservative, to push only one philosophy on children. Since philosophies are not necessarily based in fact or evidence, all have equal footing. Greek polytheism and naturalism, Hindu and Chinese philosophy, and Christian monotheism are all fascinating human methods of trying to make sense of life.
When it comes to science, I advocate an equally conservative approach. Only teach science that has been long vetted by the scientific community, and which is therefore the underpinning of modern revolutions. The most modern physics I learned in the public schools was about 35-50 years old. Why? That’s how long it takes good science to be proven solid and useful. That’s conservative. This was good for me, because I had a chance to learn problem solving and experimental investigation in a rigorous and time-tested series of subjects, which are now the tools I commonly use to investigate the natural world.
.. [TAOMPH219] http://steve.cooleysekula.net/blog/?p=679
