hit tracker
Physical Sciences Earth Sciences Biology Front Page Medicine Neurosciences Culture

User login

Columnists

Banner

Creationists push for critical thinking (no joke)

User picture for pigliucci

About Massimo Pigliucci

Massimo Pigliucci is Professor in the Departments of Ecology & Evolution and of Philosophy at Stony Brook University, NY.

His research is on the evolution of genotype-environment interactions and on the relative roles of constraints and natural selection in evolutionary biology. He also has an interest in epistemology and philosophy of science. He received a Doctorate in Genetics from the University of Ferrara in Italy, a PhD in Botany from the University of Connecticut, and a PhD in Philosophy of Science from the University of Tennessee.

He has published 96 technical papers, four books on evolutionary biology and two books for the general public.

Pigliucci has won the Dobzhansky Prize from the Society for the Study of Evolution. He has been elected fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science “for fundamental studies of genotype by environment interactions and for public defense of evolutionary biology from pseudoscientific attack.” He is also an editor for the Quarterly Review of Biology and for Biology & Philosophy. He can be reached on the web at www.genotypebyenvironment.org.

Rationally Speaking

Science & Society

Creationists and intelligent design proponents have scored an important victory in Louisiana this week, at least for now. In its appalling lack of wisdom, that State’s legislature overwhelmingly approved a bill that requires teachers to introduce to their students material that “promotes critical thinking skills.” The Republican Governor of Louisiana, Bobby Jindal, predictably said that he will sign the bill into law because “the way we are going to have smart and intelligent kids is exposing them to the very best science,” according to an article in (a real) Science magazine.

What’s wrong with that?, the naive reader may reasonably ask. Surely the main point of education is in fact to instill critical thinking skills into students, just like the bill says. Precisely, and since this is what every teacher in the country is already striving to do, do we need a law for it? It would be like passing a law directing all physicians to do their best to save people’s lives, or mechanics to repair cars. Duh. No, the new bill is the handiwork of the infamous Discovery Institute, the Seattle so-called Think Tank that has been pushing intelligent design creationism for more than a decade now (and who suffered a spectacular defeat two years ago in the Dover, PA case).

The new strategy is to cry out for “academic freedom,” which is then interpreted as the freedom to teach nonsense about the history of life on earth. Imagine if astrologers were to invoke academic freedom so that astronomy classes would include the preparation of horoscopes and the “critical” assessment of the Copernican theory. That’s just about what is going to happen in Louisiana, and probably in several other states, unless there is a successful legal challenge or grassroots movement like the one being currently attempted by the Louisiana Coalition for Science under the guidance of philosopher-activistBarbara Forrest.

One way to smell the rat here is to look at the specific language of the bill, which says in part that educators are encouraged to hold “an open and objective discussion of scientific theories being studied, including but not limited to evolution, the origins of life, global warming, and human cloning.” If you think this is not a (maliciously) intelligently designed list you are far too optimistic about human nature and the current Republican war against science. (Notice, too, that “human cloning” isn’t a theory, but a technological possibility with obvious ethical implications. But there is no point in being too subtle here.)

Despite the dismay at how easily such a gross manipulation of the concept of academic freedom can pass muster, or at how willfully and disingenuously a large number of politicians keep pandering to the minimum common denominators of the American public, there is some silver lining in this story. It comes from taking the relatively long view on the issue of the evolution wars. Less than a century ago, the battle in Dayton, TN was about prohibiting the teaching of evolution altogether, and the forces of obscurantism won. They have been on the retreat ever since, first having to accept the teaching of evolution in public schools as the default position, then having to invent a series of ever more esoteric and vague versions of their “ideas” to keep fighting on the legal front (equal time for creation “science,” disclaimers about evolution on textbooks, intelligent design admitting that god might not be the designer, and so on). Now they have been pushed so far into the corner that they can only resort to generic appeals to critical thinking and academic freedom, the very same concepts that are daily rejected by right wing religionists.

Want some real critical thinking? How about critically reading the Bible as just one of many “sacred” books written by perfectly human beings, the product of an ignorant and bigoted era? Or perhaps we should ask our students to critically think about the efficacy of “abstinence only” sexual programs that the current Administration keeps pushing on the basis of its misguided ide-theology? Or maybe critical thinking exercises in our classrooms should include a study of how it happened that the United States went to war on false premises, is wasting hundreds of thousands of lives (I’m counting the Iraqis here) and trillions of dollars, all in the name of greed and national pride? Now, that is a critical thinking curriculum I can get behind. Any chance it will pass in Louisiana?

Technorati Tags:

Want some real critical

Want some real critical thinking? How about critically reading the Bible as just one of many “sacred” books written by perfectly human beings, the product of an ignorant and bigoted era?

This sounds like evolution is like a religion to you. Your argument is absurd. First of all, the Bible wasn't written by "perfectly human beings" but imperfect human beings who believed in God. Nobody except you that I'm aware of calls them "perfect". Second of all, what era are you talking about? The various books (like Genesis, Exodus, Numbers) and the Gospels where all written in different eras.

Who ever heard about not challenging or be critical of scientific proposals? It's like saying Wimps: Weakly Interacting Massive Particles are real even though nobody has detected any, nor has anybody seen them, but the particles are certain to exist...You mean to tell me that students should just take that information as blind faith and be not be critical...? Even there are disputes about which model is right in naturalism, for example the origins of the moon.

"twoedgesword" writes,

"twoedgesword" writes, "Nobody except you that I'm aware of calls them 'perfect'." Of course, Pigliucci did not call them "perfect." He called them "perfectly human." Big difference.

"twoedgesword" also uses this error in interpretation to argue that "This sounds like evolution is like a religion to you." Really? What in the world does the question "How about critically reading the Bible as just one of many 'sacred' books written by perfectly human beings?" have to do with making evolution a religion?

And then "twoedgesword" asks "Who ever heard about not challenging or being critical of scientific proposals?" But, of course, he never even attempts to deal with the primary point, as stated explicitly by : "The new strategy is to cry out for 'academic freedom,' which is then interpreted as the freedom to teach nonsense about the history of life on earth."

So, as usual, we observe that rather than actually dealing with the real issues, all we get are word games used to make it seem as if the issues are being addressed when in fact the rhetoric is nothing more than a facade.

In reality, all kinds of aspects of evolution are scrutinized in detail and challenged all the time in the professional science research. In the rhetoric they use, creationists are quite deliberately pretending deceitfully that this isn't going on in science, because they're deceitfully pretending that evolution isn't really scientific but is only maintained in the scientific community ("big science") by a conspiracy against creationists. (Of course, there isn't any conspiracy because the real problem is simply that creationism isn't science, it's religious beliefs.)

Word games and more word games - it's all creationists have, it's all they can use, because in regard to the actually empirical ideas that creationists propose they're attempting to prop up scientifically false ideas (especially with the young earth creationists), and in regard to the legal context in the United States creationists have been trying out various strategies over the last few decades in attempts to get around the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment so they can get their religious beliefs about creationism (and attacks against evolution as motivated by their religious beliefs) into public school science classes.

The law recently passed in Louisiana (like a number of bills that have been or are being considered in other states in recent months), part of the newest creationist strategy as recently outlined by creationists at the Discovery Institute, is little more than creationists trying to provide legal cover for creationists who are public school science teachers who inject attacks against science based on their religious beliefs (i.e., not really based on science) into the classroom.

This is a horribly

This is a horribly depressing development. However, the ACLU has promised to fight this as a violation of the Establishment Clause.

I get so sick of these creopigs trying to cram Christianity down everyone's throat. And I'm a Christian.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
BoldItalicLinkQuote
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote> <sub> <sup><iframe><img>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
More information about formatting options Captcha Image: you will need to recognize the text in it.
Please type in the letters/numbers that are shown in the image above.

Category Feeds

Science Jobs

Books By Writers Here

Internships

We do offer unpaid internships in programming and science journalism to college students or recent graduates seeking to build up their portfolios.

Development interns will need to be proficient in PHP and CSS and provide samples of work done in a multi-user environment platform and sign a non-disclosure agreement.

Science journalists will need to provide samples from a university newspaper or professional publication and list which semester they want to work.

Please use the contact info available in the footer of the page.