My reaction to the U.S. News and World Report’s article on
religion and education in the U.S. by Jessica Calefati (2009).
The first of two
issues discussed was devoted to the moment of silence issue. It occurred in Illinois
where a federal judge ruled against schools requiring a moment of silence.
According to the article this meant prayer
or personal reflection. Proponents wanted a law to require prayer in public
schools and a judge said it was unconstitutional. Those against it, such as the
ACLU, felt it was a veiled mechanism of bringing prayer into the schools.
The next issue was whether
the Texas State Board of Education should revise its science curriculum. The
issue here was evolution. The current science curriculum requires science
students to “explore
and critique ‘the strengths and
weaknesses’ of all scientific theories.” Proponents of a new wording to the
curriculum not only feel there are no scientifically verifiable weaknesses to Darwin’s
theory of evolution but they also want to change the wording so that it would call
on students to “analyze and evaluate scientific explanations using empirical
evidence."
What are
my initial thoughts? I think those proposing a change in the Texas curriculum
have stayed within the boundaries of science. Their suggested wording makes sense
– insofar as science goes. I do take
issue with the statement which said there were “no” scientifically verifiable
weaknesses in Darwin’s theory of evolution. That doesn’t mean that a future Texas
student, when allowed to discuss evolutionary theory, will not come up with a
new idea that supersedes Darwin. It just means that right now the best explanation
of the data is Darwin’s theory.Flags go up when one sees another being overly defensive,
as opposed to detached.
They
could have accomplished the same thing by wording it something like the
following: “Whereas federal courts have banned the teaching of creationism and
intelligent design, we would like to emphasize that discussion on evolution (or
the changing of life over time) in science class is not prohibited, but is to
be confined to the realm of science wherein the data is to be analyzed and
evaluated using scientific explanations and empirical evidence.” This of course
allows for my personal thinking that there are possible new and very
interesting explanations for the abundant data. I generally think that people,
scientists in particular perhaps, are afraid of the religion issue in general
and the “separation of church and state” clause
from the Constitution – i.e. the First Amendment which says, "Congress
shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the
free exercise thereof."
As
to why I think scientist are afraid of it, I feel it is because they know they
are actually getting outside of the area of science. When they discuss things
such as evolution, this naturally leads to a broader topic which is outside of
the purview of science; that being such subjects more open to opinion and speculation
as philosophy, cosmology, metaphysics and ontology. In other words one who is
taught, via data collected from fossils and geologic records, that our life
forms have begun from a primitive state and through time have come to be what
they are today, may next ask the bigger questions such as where did it all come from and is there meaning to life? These are questions that push the
limits of the scientific method. They push them right into the realm of their
dreaded enemy – religion. I say this because I feel the difference between
religion and scientific methods stretched
to the limits is very insignificant.
Generally
I feel men need to understand that the various religions on the planet are not
unlikely sources of subtle, hidden, time-pondered deep questions of the nature
of reality. They are in fact good sources of knowledge on such deep and subtle
issues.
But
don’t get me wrong, there are plenty churches or religions which apparently fail
to acknowledge the value of science. And
neither are they open minded in their willingness to consider others opinions.
Humility
is always a good option.
Reference:
Calefati, Jessica (2009). Religion
in Schools Debate Heats Up. U.S. News and World reports. Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/on-education/2009/01/22/religion-in-schools-debate-heats-up
