The science of beginnings
So I'm sitting around with my TV on, and catch Nick News, where they're doing a special edition on teaching Intelligent Design in public schools. What follows is my own opinion on the subject.
Definition of terms:
[e]volution: over time, elements of nature adapt to their environment for better survival; the classic example being the Peppered Moth, where the dominant colour changed from light to dark as area pollution altered the colour of tree trunks.
[E]volution (Theory of): postulated by Charles Darwin; essentially, life started at random in a genetic soup, and over millions of years characteristics developed into traits developed into species, etc.
Fact: Proven, objective truth.
Intelligent Design (Explanation of): the postulation that a super- (or supra-)natural force - usually god - directed the development of life.
Honestly, I think we've past the point where we can ignore postulations on the origins of life, and kids should have some sort of background in different opinions. Plus, having the two of them together makes for a good teaching tool. Mind you, I don't think that either origin postulation should be taught for and of itself - they're both crap, as far as a science class is concerned. However, they make for an excellent lesson in accurate terminology.
It goes like this: Scientific theories combine facts and speculation into a model of the world - in whole or in part - that can be tested via controlled experiments. The Theory of Evolution is justified in it's name, because tests (or, more likely, archeological discoveries) can, in fact, prove or disprove it. Intelligent Design, cannot scientifically claim to be a theory, as there's no way to prove or disprove god. If necessary, the scientific position toward the origins of life can be covered with, "We just don't know."
The teacher spends - at most - a single class period at the beginning of the class covering this. Then, at the appropriate point in the curriculum then can cover the scientific fact of evolution.
Definition of terms:
[e]volution: over time, elements of nature adapt to their environment for better survival; the classic example being the Peppered Moth, where the dominant colour changed from light to dark as area pollution altered the colour of tree trunks.
[E]volution (Theory of): postulated by Charles Darwin; essentially, life started at random in a genetic soup, and over millions of years characteristics developed into traits developed into species, etc.
Fact: Proven, objective truth.
Intelligent Design (Explanation of): the postulation that a super- (or supra-)natural force - usually god - directed the development of life.
Honestly, I think we've past the point where we can ignore postulations on the origins of life, and kids should have some sort of background in different opinions. Plus, having the two of them together makes for a good teaching tool. Mind you, I don't think that either origin postulation should be taught for and of itself - they're both crap, as far as a science class is concerned. However, they make for an excellent lesson in accurate terminology.
It goes like this: Scientific theories combine facts and speculation into a model of the world - in whole or in part - that can be tested via controlled experiments. The Theory of Evolution is justified in it's name, because tests (or, more likely, archeological discoveries) can, in fact, prove or disprove it. Intelligent Design, cannot scientifically claim to be a theory, as there's no way to prove or disprove god. If necessary, the scientific position toward the origins of life can be covered with, "We just don't know."
The teacher spends - at most - a single class period at the beginning of the class covering this. Then, at the appropriate point in the curriculum then can cover the scientific fact of evolution.