ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Religion & Law Blogs -> Thoughts in a Haystack

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Religion & Law

: Thoughts in a Haystack

And So It Begins

By John Pieret

ADVERTISEMENTS

A six-member committee of teachers, college professors and curriculum experts nominated by the Texas State Board of Education has released its recommendation for new standards for the biology curriculum. The recommendation would eliminate the teaching of ideas "based upon purported forces outside of nature." The proposal would also remove language in the current standards requiring that students be taught the "strengths and weaknesses" of all scientific theories.

Kevin Fisher, a science coordinator from the Lewisville school district and a member of the committee, said they wanted to ensure that evolution was presented in a "21st century," "unadulterated fashion" and to clarify that a scientific theory is more than just an educated guess.

We actually have more evidence for evolution occurring than we do for the law of gravity. ... Something doesn't become a theory if it's got weaknesses. There may be some questions that may yet to be answered, but nothing that's to the level of a weakness.

It ain't gonna be easy, though. Don McLeroy, the state board chairman, opposes removing the "strengths and weaknesses" language:

I'd argue it doesn't make sense scientifically to take it out. Evolution shouldn't have anything to worry about ? if there's no weaknesses, there's no weaknesses. But if there's scientifically testable explanations out there to refute it, shouldn't those be included too?

This is the same person who is on record as believing that there are two systems of science, a creationist system and a "naturalist" system.

The fact that the chairman of the state board of education doesn't understand science and is willing to call a narrowly sectarian religious idea "science" is more than enough reason to fear for science education in the state. And not just in Texas. McLeroy is also on record as saying that he prefers the "strengths and weaknesses" language because it allows the board to reject a textbook that doesn't cover the "weaknesses" of evolution. As the second largest purchaser of school textbooks after California, what Texas demands be included in the books it buys greatly influences what will be available across the nation, since publishers won't want to produce multiple editions.

Mealy mouthed as always, McLeroy will be coming at the issue sideways:

McLeroy said that in addition to leaving the "strengths and weaknesses" language, he would like to include the National Academy of Sciences' definition of science and their discussion of its limitations.

"Even they admit science doesn't have all the answers," he said.

But science has all the scientific answers and why would there be a need to teach nonscientific "answers" in a science class?

It's going to be a tough (and, unfortunately, political) fight. Seven of fifteen board members appear to support, at least to some extent, the teaching of the "weaknesses" of evolution in science classrooms. Six are opposed, and two ? Geraldine Miller, R-Dallas, and Rick Agosto, D-San Antonio ? are considered swing votes. People in Texas who like being beyond the horse and buggy days will have to get busy.

As is more and more the case these days, the charge of "elitism" and "censorship" has already raised its ugly (and disingenuous) head:

Jonathan Saenz of the conservative Free Market Foundation said it is "outrageous that these educrats have expelled the truth from state standards that have been in place for over 20 years."

"This type of pure censorship in shutting down a debate is the exact opposite of what true science is supposed to be. We strongly disagree with their recommendation."

But "true" science is "elitist," in the sense that not every person's opinion is equal. The person with empirical and testable facts and theories on his or her side wins in science. Of course, science is the opposite of elitism at the same time, since anyone can go out and find those empirical facts and construct those testable theories. Do that and there is no way you can be censored.

What you can't do is just import "facts" and "theories" from bronze age mythologies.
.

Full post as published by Thoughts in a Haystack on September 24, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0022 secs (from cache 11/04/26 20:06:53)