Creationism in Science lessons?

A good idea?

The Story

• On the 13th September 2008, the BBC reported that Professor Michael Reiss, director of education at the Royal Society, gave his opinion that creationism should be taught in school science lessons. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/education/7612152.stm

• However, this should be taught not as science but a “world view”

The conflict!

Why teach it in science?

• “Prof Reiss, a biologist and Church of England minister, said he now believed it was more effective to engage with pupils' ideas about creationism, rather than to obstruct discussion with those who do not accept the scientific version of the evolution of species.”

Why can it not be taught in Science?

• As evolution is a theory and is taught in science, why should creationism be treated differently?

• If it is more effective for children, why should we not put it in our science lessons?

• Two simple answers …

Mistaken identity. • As American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and

historian of science Stephen Jay Gould said: • “Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and

theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts do not go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's, but apples did not suspend themselves in mid-air, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from apelike ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other, yet to be discovered.” – (Gould 1981: 34-37)

Its just not science!

• Richard Dawkins argues in his book The God Delusion that fundamentalist ideas are not to be considered science as it “debauches the scientific enterprise” and “subverts science and saps the intellect.” (Dawkins 2006: 284).

• “The truth of the holy book is an axiom, not the end product of a process of reasoning. The book is true, and if the evidence seems to contradict it, it is the evidence that must be thrown out, not the book.”(Dawkins 2006: 283-284)

What makes evolution science?

.Evolution follows the understanding that science is a practise that praises falsification. Darwin argues that, even as a believer of evolution, if overwhelming evidence were to pop up tomorrow disproving evolution, he would “abandon it overnight”.

Question!• If, as Reiss said, creationism should be treated as a world view,

should it not be discussed in classes that discuss other world views such as Religious Studies?

• Simon Underdown, senior lecturer in the department of anthropology at Oxford Brookes University, thought just this!

• “Creationism should be taught within the context of religion rather than science. It is not something that fits within the mainstream of science. With so much to be crammed into science lessons, it was not a worthwhile use of time to include lessons about creationism – (www.bbc.co.uk)

• If evolution is to accepted as scientific fact, do you think this would have children thinking for themselves? Or is their religious upbringings and belief too cemented in their upbringings for them to accept a different theory?