This is a blog to discuss philosophy, chess, politics,
C. S. Lewis, or whatever it is that I'm in the mood to discuss.
That doesn't really surprise me. Teachers should be allowed to teach what they want, within reason. They shouldn't be coerced to teach intelligent design if they don't believe in it. I think we should start treating the high school curriculum the way college professors teach. It's also my humble opinion that high school students should be required to take logic. Students need to learn how to think, and not always what to think.
"Teachers should be allowed to teach what they want, within reason."That's the crux. One person's anachronism is another's reasonable inquirer. Biology teachers, specifically, should teach biology, not any theory they find reasonable. And ID just isn't part of biology. This seems just another tactic of the Discovery Institute to let their views in the back door. They aren't saying "Wait for ID to become scientifically respectable [because it is not], and then it will naturally work its way into textbooks." They are really saying "Give teachers the freedom to teach about our side of things." Who does this benefit in this religiously fueled battle Christians (with a certain silly conception of God) have been waging? Is it neutral? No, it helps them.
Who does this benefit in this religiously fueled battle Christians (with a certain silly conception of God) have been waging? Is it neutral? No, it helps them.First of all, so what?Second of all, if that were their primary motivation, wouldn't they be better off supporting this bill?
WMF: Note I said nothing about their primary motivation.The post that Victor links to gives off airs of standing outside the fray when it comes to classrooms. But this is misleading. While their primary explicit motivation is to question naturalistic theories of evolution, that doesn't mean they don't want this insinuated into classrooms. It certainly doesn't mean that they are neutral about what goes on in the classrooms. To the contrary.
It certainly doesn't mean that they are neutral about what goes on in the classrooms. To the contrary.Hold the presses.
Yes, so it is especially silly that the article feigns such impartiality. Luskin is a hack.
If that's what you want to read, sure, keep telling that yourself.
Zach, I agree that biology teachers should teach biology and nothing more. Nevertheless, I think it would be a good idea for high school students to take philosophy, where theological issues may be freely discussed. High schoolers are close to becoming full-grown adults and it would benefit them to be exposed to philosophical concepts, including natural theology.
I just fail to see how intelligent design is a scientific theory, it seems much more philosophically oriented in its evidence and conclusion than scientific. I think it should be taught in philosophy classes, not science classes.
Post a Comment