(quote) Paul-1057122 said: A post in yesterday's Post and Courier caught my attention. An education committee has approved South Carolina not teaching "natural selection" as fact. From TFA:
[SC Senator Mike] Fair argued South Carolina's students are learning the
philosophy of natural selection but teachers are not calling it such. He
said the best way for students to learn is for the schools to teach the
"To teach that natural selection is the
answer to origins is wrong," Fair said. "I don't have a problem with
teaching theories. I don't think it should be taught as fact."
Ultimately, the committee approved all measures except
that clause, which now gets sent back to the committee level for review.
State Superintendent of Education Mick Zais said after the meeting he
was not surprised by the debate that took place.
has been going on here in South Carolina for a long a time," Zais said.
"We ought to teach both sides and let students draw their own
conclusions."I've read a lot of comments on this story on Slashdot (a tech news aggregator) and most of the posters think this is asinine. One particular comment sums it up as such:
The distinction between what is and
is not "science" doesn't mean much to those who want to make sure that
their kids are not taught lies in school.
Some people turn to
religion to gain certainty where there is none. In order for this
psychological device to work, they must honestly believe that the points
of their religious teaching are inarguable fact, and that any evidence
to the contrary is a result of either incompetence or deception. People
who believe this don't give a hoot what is or is not "science," since
they only care about what does or does not agree with their forgone
"Teach the controversy," is the second-best stance
that they take only because they know that "teach our religion as fact"
is already a lost battle (but would still be the best option).
to get logical consistency on these points is futile, since the basic
motivation has nothing to do with challenging kids to think critically,
and everything to do with ensuring that their kids don't lose their
faith by going to school.So is this a good thing or will it serve to drive the wedge of secularism even deeper?
It doesn't necessarily have to be either or.