Why not teach both?

[Memoryfull]

I would like to ask you your opinions on schools teaching either the creationist or evolution theory within a school system.

I was personally taught both. While at a high school in mexico I had a biology class where the evolution theory was explained to us, and at the same time a theology class in which we were taught the creationist theory. This was in a catholic school (in which I was probably the only atheist).

I simply wonder why people would be against being taught both theories and having a free choice instead of simply being forced fed a single theory.

 

[televator]

Well because in principle, a school's basic function is to TEACH children, not misguide or confuse them. Also, Evolution is not a theory in the same way that creationism is a "theory", so lumping both together as "theories" is a bit of a false equivocation.

 

[RichardMNixon]

I would like to ask you your opinions on schools teaching either the creationist or evolution theory within a school system.

I was personally taught both. While at a high school in mexico I had a biology class where the evolution theory was explained to us, and at the same time a theology class in which we were taught the creationist theory. This was in a catholic school (in which I was probably the only atheist).

I simply wonder why people would be against being taught both theories and having a free choice instead of simply being forced fed a single theory.

1. It's a complete waste of time.
2. Teaching them in the same class disingenuously suggests that they have equivalent merit. I'm fine with creationism being taught in mythology class, not in biology. There's no more reason to teach creationism in biology than there is to teach holocaust denial in history, the four humors in med school, astrology in physics, or Dawkins' favorite, the Stork theory of reproduction in health class. It's completely and blatantly wrong. Why would we deliberately teach children things that are wrong?

Students aren't "force fed" evolution any more than they're force fed 2+2=4.

 

[Aught3]

Actually I'm not so sure that many people would be against that*. The big objection is teaching creationism in a science classroom.


*Although people may have objections to teaching a single religion in public schools.

 

[scalyblue]

I would like to ask you your opinions on schools teaching either the creationist or evolution theory within a school system.

I was personally taught both. While at a high school in mexico I had a biology class where the evolution theory was explained to us, and at the same time a theology class in which we were taught the creationist theory. This was in a catholic school (in which I was probably the only atheist).

I simply wonder why people would be against being taught both theories and having a free choice instead of simply being forced fed a single theory.

Creationism isn't a theory, and it isn't science.

As this is a can of worms topic, let me just copypasta a snippet from the ruling in regards to creationism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McLean_v._Arkansas

The judgement defined the essential characteristics of science as being:

• It is guided by natural law;
• It has to be explanatory by reference to natural law;
• It is testable against the empirical world;
• Its conclusions are tentative, i.e. are not necessarily the final word; and
• It is falsifiable.

Since creationism doesn't adhere to those guidelines, it can't be considered a science, and needs to stay out of science classes. Nobody has a problem when it is being taught in a theology class; the problem arises when it is being taught as science, in a science class.

 

[Laurens]

I think teaching people that there is such a theory as creationism is all well and good, I mean after all most people are going to encounter it at some point in their lives anyway.

However creationism should NOT be taught as truth, and it should be explained when taught that unlike evolution, there is no evidence for creationism, and that a lot of their claims are wrong.

I'm all for people teaching children that creationism is a weak theory in contrast to evolution

 

[Memoryfull]

If you read my post the creationist theory wasn't taught in a science class, but in a theology class. the two were completely separate.

Also what i meant by forced fed, wasn't in regards to evolution, but to creationism. I do believe in evolution, simply because of the overwhelming evidence for it.

I guess the way I see it, to disregard a theory one must have knowledge over that theory, unlike the massive amount of theists that disregard evolution or the big bang, while not having really studied them.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

I simply wonder why people would be against being taught both theories and having a free choice instead of simply being forced fed a single theory.

Because you're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts. Creationism is a collection of made-up nonsense and lies, and schools shouldn't teach lies.

 

[RedYellow]

Taxpayers pay teachers to teach actual science. Creationism is not science, it relies firmly on supernatural explanations that cannot be tested. Evolution is science, because just about every important aspect of it can be tested and observed. Evolution relies firmly on the basic idea that life reproduces with variation, and that variation has no limit so that over time, groups of different forms would arise and branch off into even more groups.

Creationism, however, relies on the idea that all life was magically created fully formed. This is not at all testable. Explains nothing about why certain organisms have varying ranges of similarities that enable them to be grouped into families and sub families.

 

[borrofburi]

If you read my post the creationist theory wasn't taught in a science class, but in a theology class. the two were completely separate.

Also what i meant by forced fed, wasn't in regards to evolution, but to creationism. I do believe in evolution, simply because of the overwhelming evidence for it.

I guess the way I see it, to disregard a theory one must have knowledge over that theory, unlike the massive amount of theists that disregard evolution or the big bang, while not having really studied them.

Well in that case, I'm cool with teaching evolution and creationism; evolution in science class, and all the various incarnations of creationism in mythology class.

 

[Anachronous Rex]

I agree with teaching the Biblical creation story in a class on religion.

While they're at it, teachers should also tell of the Greek creation story, the Hindu creation story, various Native American creation stories, Norse creation myths, the Egyptian creation story, Chinese creation stories, the Shinto creation story, and especially the Zoroastrian creation story (so children could see where the Jews got it from.)

That would be fine.

 

[MRaverz]

Creationism isn't science, simple as that. Intelligent Design isn't even science.

 

[Duvelthehobbit666]

I think it might be a good idea to teach creationism in a science classroom. But then of course, it should be explained why it does not hold up to basic scientific scrutiny.

 

[RedYellow]

^Hey I think you're on to something. Nothing has taught me more about evolution than creationism. When I started watching youtube vids, back when VFX was in town, I didn't know very much about it. It took all the utterly stupid arguments and obvious frauds to show me why evolution made so much sense in light of the garbage that creationists spewed.

 

[CosmicJoghurt]

Just leave creationism to church and those theistic-church-lessons-I-don't-know-the-English-word-for. To teach it in school is as valid as my theory that 101 fairies all named Rose held their wands together and screamed YAHA, and thus the universe was born.

 

[Divergedwoods]

I think that one of the main problems with the propositions to teach creationism is that by "teach" the apparently mean "making stuff up and presenting long refuted arguments that no one believes (with good reasons)"
I don't see a problem with teaching creationism in a theology class (they don't really have much of choice there) but theology classes should only be optional (for the kid to choose)
Personally I wasn't taught creationism, however it was mentioned, in the only way that you should mention creationism in a science classroom, as context, as a quick history review on the evolution of human understanding, as an example of the long debunked theories that science has replaced along with geocentrism, "flatearthism", spontaneous generation"¦

Just leave creationism to church and those theistic-church-lessons-I-don't-know-the-English-word-for.

Catechism?

 

[Jotto999]

Because one of them is idiotic and not a real theory?

The only way I can reasonably see it being taught in the same classroom as science, is it being demonstrated and discussed in full view of it's incredible wrongness, by which I mean the course pointing out how religion's use in finding stuff out is worthless in today's society. Maybe include it in with a history of science kind of thing and point out how people tried to explain things with religion, but it was always wrong, perhaps used as some sort of introductory to how actual science works. That would be all right, and the students would learn some history and get a nice perspective on shitty methodologies compared to good, reliable ones.

 

[FaithlessThinker]

Just leave creationism to church and those theistic-church-lessons-I-don't-know-the-English-word-for.

"Sunday school" - A little bit of god after a week full of science.

To the OP:
The word "theory" is misunderstood by many people. You can't blame them though, they're not all scientists.

In science, theories come and go, and the only ones that stay are the ones that have valid testable evidence or proof backing them up.

So far, there is no evidence to creationism/ID (and I doubt there will ever be), but there is an overwhelming amount of evidence for evolution (that's why Darwin is still remembered).

Teach kids only what you can demonstrate. Some day some of them will question you.

 

[CosmicJoghurt]

Catechism?

That's the word!

 

[DepricatedZero]

teach the controversy: