Re: Peer review and ID

I largely agree here and, as a professor in a small liberal arts college I
am naturally a big fan of the contributions the liberal arts make to all
academic disciplines. If I thought the majority of ID proponents were
genuinely motivated by a desire to improve science education by the
inclusion of more history and philosphy of science topics, I would not be
nearly as concerned.

Instead, what I see in a religiously-motivated movement to present ID as an
alternative to evolutionary theory and convince students that the theory of
evolution is in crisis* and will soon go the way of the passenger pigeon and

the 8-track cassette player. Virtually no reputable scientists believe that
is the case, and to suggest to students otherwise is to do them a
disservice.

A second side effect is to reinforce the notion that science and a Christian

worldview are incompatible, which ultimately hurt both Christians and
scientists.

Ted wrote:
> One of the most fundamental problems in science education,
> IMO, is
> that there has usually been *too little* attention to "liberal arts"
> aspects
> of the sciences, such as history and philosophy of science. Now that
> more
> states are recognizing the importance of those aspects by requiring
> some
> things from HPS to be taught in schools, it seems suddenly backwards to
> rule
> out discussing ID simply b/c it has a religious dimension. So many
> other
> things schools *are* allowed to discuss have religious dimensions--the
> abortion debate, the history of the United States, the civil rights
> movement, etc, etc. etc.

*Was it just me, or was there a clear subtext in the Dover statement: "The
only reason you gotta learn this evolution stuff is because it's on the
standardized tests!" ?
__
Louise M. Freeman, PhD
Psychology Dept
Mary Baldwin College
Staunton, VA 24401
540-887-7326
FAX 540-887-7121
Received on Fri Oct 21 13:23:41 2005