This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ian Pitchford (talk | contribs) at 18:48, 9 April 2005 (add see also - expand discussion). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 18:48, 9 April 2005 by Ian Pitchford (talk | contribs) (add see also - expand discussion)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)The Teach the Controversy movement proposes an education policy for the public schools that entails presenting to students the actual scientific evidence for and against evolution, and then encouraging students to evaluate the evidence themselves. It is supported by the Discovery Institute, a US group supportive of intelligent design, and law professor Phillip E. Johnson, one of the founders of the intelligent design movement and author of the wedge strategy . In support of this idea proponents point to popular misconceptions on the evidence and alleged factual errors and misrepresentations in current textbooks. While there are a variety of views within the movement, Johnson and the Discovery Institute do not believe that teaching intelligent design should be required, but that evidence for and against evolution should be presented fairly. The Discovery Institute web site states the following:
"Instead of mandating intelligent design, Discovery Institute recommends that states and school districts focus on teaching students more about evolutionary theory, including telling them about some of the theory's problems that have been discussed in peer-reviewed science journals. In other words, evolution should be taught as a scientific theory that is open to critical scrutiny, not as a sacred dogma that can't be questioned. We believe this is a common-sense approach that will benefit students, teachers, and parents."
Some opponents regard the movement as a ploy to introduce creationism into the science curriculum and claim that it and the closely allied intelligent design movement are based on philosophical and a priori arguments rather than the scientific evidence for evolution by natural selection. Proponents view such accusations as baseless and conspiracy theory paranoia aimed at stifling debate on the scientific evidence. They find it remarkable that any serious scientist would favor teaching students only evidence that supports macroevolution. They suggest that the scientific and educational communities should review their policy and proposed teaching aids, which they submit have nothing to do with creation science.
The response of mainstream scientists to the campaign against evolutionary theory has been unequivocal. In August 2001 the leaders of 80 scientific and educational organizations responded to a Senate resolution singling out evolution as a controversial theory thus:
"Evolutionary theory ranks with Einstein's theory of relativity as one of modern science's most robust, generally accepted, thoroughly tested and broadly applicable concepts. From the standpoint of science, there is no controversy. If the point of the resolution is to encourage teaching about political controversy surrounding scientific topics, then evolution is just one of a legion of issues that are the subject of political debate. It should not be singled out. Confusing political with scientific controversy on the topic of biological evolution will weaken science education."
Leading organizations such as the National Academy of Sciences, the National Association of Biology Teachers, and the National Science Teachers Association collaborate with the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) to defend the teaching of evolution in public schools . The NCSE has monitored many of the Discovery Institute's activities, finding misrepresentation of scientists , educational resources , science journalists , science journals , history and federal law .
The website TalkDesign.org has been established to provide "an archive of materials that critically examine the scientific claims of the ID movement" .
See also
Howard Ahmanson, Jr Bruce Chapman Center for Science and Culture Discovery Institute Intelligent design Phillip E. Johnson Wedge strategy
External links
Pro and Con
- Wired magazine article on Intelligent Design movement
- Discovery Institute critique of Wired article and list of alleged misrepresentations
Pro
- Reprint of Washington Post OpEd piece approving of teaching the controversy
- Discovery Institute's educational position and links
- Discovery Institutes's fact sheet discussing the controversy regarding the Cambrian Explosion
- Discovery Institute's fact sheet discussing the controversy regarding whether microevolution can explain macroevolution
- The "Wedge Document": "So What?" (An explanation by the Discovery Institute)