(December 4, 2016 at 7:03 pm)RoadRunner79 Wrote: Forgive me if I am incorrect, but it sounds like what you are saying, is that you would prefer that they are just indoctrinated with the current consensus, and not be taught how to think critically about the information.Students would be taught evolution as part of a biology course. If you are teaching science, you do not only inform students of the "what" of evolution. You explain the "how" so that they will understand the "why." A biology major should understand evolution on his own and know how to research and test it, or he's not doing science.
Quote:I do think that it is lucky for evolution, that it didn't have to go through the standards you describe. And I don't think that there will be much to teach in regards to evolution, if you are consistent.Are you claiming that the theory of evolution is not the result of the application of the scientific method, or that it has been shielded from being tested? I think it's the opposite-- because it was such a controversial theory it has undergone constant testing and refining. It forms the basis for a lot of medical research and has been strongly supported by genetics, allowing for the development of the field of phylogenetics. Which is to say that now there are more ways in which to test the theory and it continues to remain relevant.
"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 don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape- like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered."
-Stephen Jay Gould
-Stephen Jay Gould
