Evolution Is a Short-Order Cook, Not a Watchmaker
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
NATURE|Vol 435|19 May 2005 CORRESPONDENCE When science meets religion in the classroom SIR – In the Editorial “Dealing with design” such a reconciliation impossible because faith scientific challenges to their faith should seek (Nature434,1053; 2005), Natureclaims that and science are two mutually exclusive ways guidance from a theologian, not a scientist. scientists have not dealt effectively with the of looking at the world. For such scientists, Scientists should never have to apologize for threat to evolutionary biology posed by Natureapparently prescribes hypocrisy. The teaching science. ‘intelligent design’ (ID) creationism. Rather real business of science teachers is to teach Jerry Coyne than ignoring, dismissing or attacking ID, science, not to help students shore up world- Department of Ecology and Evolution, University scientists should, the editors suggest, learn views that crumble when they learn science. of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois 60637, USA how religious people can come to terms And ID creationism is not science, despite Peter AtkinsLincoln College, University of Oxford with science, and teach these methods of the editors’ suggestion that ID “tries to use Colin BlakemoreMedical Research Council, London accommodation in the classroom. The goal scientific methods to find evidence of God in Richard DawkinsOxford University Museum, University of Oxford of science education should thus be “to point nature”. Rather, advocates of ID pretend to use Steve JonesGalton Laboratories, University College London to options other than ID for reconciling scientific methods to support their religious Richard LewontinMuseum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University science and belief ”. In this way, students’ faith preconceptions. It has no more place in the John Maddox 9 Pitt Street, London W8 4NX will not be challenged by scientific truth, and biology classroom than geocentrism has in Paul NurseThe Rockefeller University, New York evolution will triumph. the astronomy curriculum. Linda PartridgeDepartment of Biology, University College London This suggestion is misguided: the science Scientists are of course free (some would James D. WatsonCold Spring Harbor Laboratories, New York classroom is the wrong place to teach say duty-bound) to fight ID outside the Steven WeinbergDepartment of Physics, University of Texas, Austin students how to reconcile science and classroom, or to harmonize religion with Lewis WolpertDepartment of Anatomy and Developmental Biology, religion. For one thing, many scientists deem science. But students who cannot handle University College London the scientific merits of evolutionist and ID should instead consider a mechanism by Teaching about ID helps claims — to the great disadvantage of ID. which intelligent designers — let’s call them students see its flaws Students who themselves determine that “Maxwell’s angels” — individually push on ID does not cut the scientific mustard will each molecule, while keeping in intelligent SIR – I have regularly taught seminars for be more effective in their support of teaching communication with each other to maintain university biology majors, which compare mainstream science. Students who remain this distribution. the scientific claims of evolution and ID. In creationists or fence-sitters will at least have a One reason that scientists famously fail doing so, I am not advocating the scientific better understanding of why ID has not been in rebutting ID is that we use the wrong merits of ID, as discussed in your News widely accepted in the scientific community. analogies. Evolution is not a blind watch- Feature “Who has designs on your students’ It may seem contradictory to offer a course maker or any other kind of engineer, but minds?” (Nature434,1062–1065; 2005). on ID and evolution in colleges and oppose rather a short-order cook, and — looking at I view these seminars as analogous to media teaching ID in high schools. But high-school the phenomenally complicated structures — literacy courses. To understand why 80% of students are just learning the basics of science. one who is less like Isaac Newton than Rube Fox News viewers had misperceptions about To expect them to make a well-reasoned Goldberg or W. Heath Robinson. Iraq, such as believing that weapons of mass judgement about the status of any scientific A terrific argument against ID came to destruction had been discovered there (see theory, including evolution, is unrealistic. me recently after two consecutive talks, one www.pipa.org), media students need to learn David Leaf on the Wnt signalling pathway, the next on how Fox News operates. Such a media Department of Biology, Western Washington G-protein crosstalk in control of cellular literacy course does not necessarily vouch for University, Bellingham, Washington 98225, USA calcium. Just look at the details, and you’ll the veracity of any particular Fox show. immediately abandon all thoughts that My interest in ID was sparked in 1999 by biological systems were designed with any a local high-school teacher who used ID intelligence whatsoever. materials in a biology course. Parents and Evolution is a short-order Chris Miller citizens successfully defended the teaching of cook, not a watchmaker HHMI, Department of Biochemistry, Brandeis mainstream science against proponents of University, Waltham, Massachusetts 02454, USA ID, in this case the Discovery Institute (see SIR – The visual shock of last week’s www.scienceormyth.org). This taught me ‘intelligent design’ cover was matched by the how effective pro-evolution groups are when perceptiveness of your News Feature (Nature they work with the school administration, 434,1062–1065; 2005) on the seepage of this Seeking evidence of God’s and are supported by faculty from local slyly religious ideology into science curricula. work undermines faith colleges and universities. But to be effective in This stuff should certainly be kept out of its support, the scientific community needs to high schools, but I am ambivalent about its SIR – Your Editorial about the promotion of understand the empirical claims of ID. presence in our universities, where free ID in schools and universities (Nature434, Although it seems to have been resurrected discussion is of greater value than correctness 1053; 2005) asks us to persuade our students for religious or cultural agendas, ID’s — political, scientific or otherwise. that science and faith do not compete, but proponents have made empirical claims that On the other hand, I’d be properly rebuked for Christians this should always have been can be examined. Many college students are and sanctioned for incompetence if I were clear. In the Bible (John 20: 25–29), Thomas curious about ID but have little knowledge to assert in my undergraduate physical- doubts that the man speaking to him is the of the claims made for it. In my experience, chemistry course that the intricate, precisely resurrected Christ until Jesus reveals his upper-level biology students with the exponential distribution of velocities wounds. Thomas then believes, but Jesus appropriate background in molecular observed in a collection of gas molecules says: “Blessed are those who have not seen biology, genetics, developmental biology is simply too perfect and beautiful to have and yet have believed”. and evolution are capable of distinguishing arisen from random collisions, but that we The Bible throughout teaches that faith is 275 © 2005Nature PublishingGroup CORRESPONDENCE NATURE|Vol 435|19 May 2005 more valuable when expressed in the absence “Building a straw man based on a mere theory. But after a century of close of evidence. For a Christian, when science is natural selection alone makes it scrutiny, evolutionary theory has passed so allowed to be neutral on the subject of God, many litmus tests of validation that evolution science can only bolster faith. In contrast, and easy for opponents to poke holes is as much a fact as respiration and digestion. I imagine without realizing it, ID proponents in evolution” — Michael Lynch Less widely appreciated is that evolution have become professional Doubting has long been the most quantitative field Thomases, funded by Doubting Thomas of biology, well grounded in the general Institutes. When advocates of ID use the of many scientists on matters of social and principles of transmission genetics. Yet few vocabulary of science to argue for God’s political concern. I recommend Huston students at university, and almost none at presence in cellular machinery or in the fossil Smith’s book Why Religion Matters high school, are exposed to the mathematical record, they too poke their fingers through (HarperSanFrancisco, 2002) for advice underpinnings of evolutionary theory. The Jesus’ hands. In so doing, ID vitiates faith. on how to handle the ID debate. teaching of evolution purely as history, with Not realizing this, many Christians now Rustum Roy little consideration given to the underlying believe they are making a stand against evil The Pennsylvania State University, 102 MRL, mechanisms, reinforces the false view that by supporting religion-infused alternatives to University Park, Pennsylvania 16802, USA evolution is one of the softer areas of science. evolution. For them, the fundamental debate Here is a missed opportunity. Our failure is not over which is wrong and which is right, ` to provide students with the mathematical but over which is good and which is bad, and skills necessary to compete in a technical the majority opinion is clear. So if we want Intelligent design or world is a major concern in the United States. to ensure the continued learning of evolution intellectual laziness? Mathematics becomes more digestible, and in our schools, we cannot only argue that even attractive, when students see its science and faith can be reconciled; we also SIR – Much of the concern over ID (Nature immediate application. What better place to have to show that ID actively undermines the 434,1053 and 1062–1065; 2005) has focused start than with the population-genetic theory basis of Christianity. on veiled attempts to inject religion into of evolution, much of which is couched in Douglas W.