Saturday, August 30, 2008

Palin & Creationism [Update]

Apparently Sarah Palin favors teaching Creationism in schools. My first thought it that this is bad. My second thought is, "Good!" Given how badly the public schools do teaching everything else, I'd prefer they ONLY teach Creationism. I can only hope the public schools STOP teaching Darwinian Natural Selection - they do such a bad job that no one will believe it.

Update: Here. It seems that the story was made up by various opponents. I still stand by the thought that it might be better for science if the public schools taught something else.

2 comments:

Pastor_Jeff said...

That cracks me up.

Seriosuly, though, terminology confuses the issue. I think most people use "evolution" as a shorthand for the purely materialistic worldview, not natural selection and adaptation. I think Palin is saying that if you're going to take evidence from observable science to draw conclusions about the origins of life, then it's fair to recognize differing explanations of the data and problems with the model.

Or maybe I'm just speaking for myself.

I'd rather not bring metaphysics into the science classroom in any case, whether it's theistic or otherwise. When people try to explain creationism, they do such a bad job that I'd prefer they stop, too.

Icepick said...

What's bad to me is that most people mention "Evolution" as a substitute for "neo-Darwinian natural selection". The second describes how the first actually happens. Evolution iteself is an observed fact. The question has been "How does it happen?"