RE: [asa] Teenagers and Evolution

George wrote:
  Debbie -

  I don't think anyone on the asa list (except perhaps some lurking
atheists) believes that "evolution is the sole cause of our existence" or
that it is "an overall answer to everything." In the 1st place evolution,
strictly speaking, is not a "cause." Evolution is a description of what
happens (or, if you wish, what is hypothesized to happen), and there are
various causes - mutation, genetic drift, natural selection &c - which may
account for an evolutionary process. Some of those those can be broken down
further.

  Now some people - Dawkins et al - think that causes like that account
entirely for evolution. I think though that almost everyone on this list
who believes that evolution has taken place believes that in some sense the
God revealed in Christ is the one who makes all those other "causes"
effective in some way. This doesn't mean that God is a "cause" of evolution
alongside the causes that science studies, but that God acts "in, with and
under" (to use a Lutheran phrase) all those causes. To put it in another
traditional way, God is the First Cause who acts through secondary causes.

  Shalom
  George
  http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/

  I appreciate that a middle ground does exist. But one wouldn't know it
from the publicized arguments about education.
    ----- I am concerned that both sides seem to want a one-sided
curriculum in the schools. I realize that some teachers shove their own
religion and beliefs down the throats of their students if given half the
chance. I appreciate that there are some good references and some wise
people who will discuss these issues with students. However, I am concerned,
as many are, that God has been taken out of the schools. Many textbooks
remove references to God from our early historical documents.

    And, in the case of evolution, I see another threat - and that is that
the narrow scientific approach can, in effect, call a lot of parents
'stupid'. It can also shut down the desire to question. This subject should
be one where students are encouraged to speak up. Their questions should be
answered in a non-judgemental way, or even confronted with other questions.
'How do you explain your creationist beliefs in light of this article by
......?' This is a respectful answer to the student's question that should
be followed up later with, 'What did you think of the article?'

    Maybe teachers should be shut down from teaching creationism. But there
should be questions that lead the students to discuss it. 'How does this
information relate to what you have been taught?' 'What do you believe
defines man?' 'Do you believe Lucy was a person? Support your response.'

    I also believe that references to God should be left in all historical
documents.

    Freedom of religion is being defined as turning religion 'off'. That is
not freedom, it is ignorance. Ignorance of religion doesn't benefit anyone.

    Teachers should perhaps be restricted from making statements about
religion. However, they should not be restricted from asking leading
questions and listening when religion is an absolutlely essential part of a
subject. How can one remove religion from history? In this case, shouldn't
the textbooks explain what the people believed and why? How can one censor
this from history without making our ancestors seem far more ignorant and
stupid than they may already appear in light of our current knowledge?

    Which brings me back to the threat of further disparaging the
relationship between parent and child. Exploration of subjects with
respectful questions can help to preserve that relationship. Respectful
treatment of the subject in textbooks can also do so.

    I dropped out of college because I came to realize that 'us' and 'them'
wasn't clearly defined and I wanted to know who 'them' was. I doubted my
parents in all areas, due to my doubts about this issue. I came to realize,
over time, that they were and are actually very enlightened. I do not agree
with any delineation of 'us' and 'them' to this day. However, my parents
only delineated due to education. Even in the 60's, they did not acknowledge
that race, religion or economic status were reasons to consider someone to
be 'them'. They lived this. I had exposure to educated people of other races
and religions in my youth. I also cannot argue that education has a great
tendency to equalize. However, there are wise people who lack formal
education and stupid, narrow-minded people with doctorates, and there are
also the rest of us who have stupid days or areas in our lives where we wear
blinders.

    Teenagers are going to rebel against their parents. But, our educational
system doesn't need to add fuel to the fire of rebellion. And teenagers need
to be educated fully. Censorship of all things religious precludes a
well-rounded education.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Jan 12 11:51:03 2007