This is a very strange story in some ways. It seems that until this week, the term “evolution” was not used in biology classrooms in the state of Florida, although teaching about biological “changes” was permitted. In the debate over potential new standards, the Board of Education ended up adopting a “compromise” position: “Evolution” must be referred to as the “scientific theory of evolution”.
It was considered a compromise because that so-called “academic freedom” amendment was proposed by the righteous wing. The reason the proposal would come from them is explained pretty clearly by Gerry Wheeler, executive director of the National Science Teachers Association.
My only concern is that ‘theory’ might be used as a wedge to start teaching controversy where there is no controversy.
The use of the term “wedge” there surely is no accident. It’s likely a direct reference to the so-called wedge strategy used by proponents of Intelligent Design.
So, on the one hand, “evolution” can be uttered and explained in Florida biology classrooms. On the other hand, apparently until now it couldn’t be, despite it being the early twenty-first century. On still another hand, it must be called the “scientific theory of evolution” because the righteous wing thinks “theory” is a synonym for “opinion”.
The joyous part of their compromise proposal, however, is that it has every potential to backfire on them.
Not only will Florida’s students learn about evolution; they’ll also learn that the scientific definition of a theory is different from the everyday definition, referring not to wild-eyed speculation but to a vast body of observation and testing that confirms a hypothesis so strongly that it might as well be considered fact.
By insisting that any reference to “evolution” be couched as the “scientific theory of evolution” because they think that “theory” simply means “opinion”, the righteous wing has managed to inject into biology classrooms the opportunity to explain to students that in science this, in fact, is not what the term means at all.
0 Responses to “Creationists Are Stupid”