DOCSLIB.ORG

Intelligent Design Should Alternatives to Evolution Theory Be Taught?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Researcher Published by CQ Press, a division of Congressional Quarterly Inc. CQ thecqresearcher.com Intelligent Design Should alternatives to evolution theory be taught? he Kansas Board of Education is likely to vote in September to replace the state’s newly updated science-teaching standards with a revised version that plays down evolution and rejects the idea that Tscience is a search for “natural” explanations only. The change would open the doors of biology classrooms to supernatural ex- planations of human life and origins, including the increasingly popular concept of “intelligent design” — the idea that life is so complex it could only have been created by an intelligent being. Believers in intelligent design see evidence of a higher School boards and lawmakers in nearly half the states, including power in such complex natural systems as the double helix structure of DNA. Georgia, Pennsylvania and New York, are examining similar pro- posals. Most scientists say intelligent design is just a new, more I N acceptable name for biblical creationism. But intelligent-design THIS REPORT S supporters argue that they only want an equal hearing for alternate THE ISSUES ......................639 I theories of life’s origins and a chance for students to examine BACKGROUND ..................646 D what they say are serious gaps in evolutionary science. CHRONOLOGY ..................647 E CURRENT SITUATION ..........651 AT ISSUE ..........................653 The CQ Researcher • July 29, 2005 • www.thecqresearcher.com OUTLOOK ........................655 Volume 15, Number 27 • Pages 637-660 BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................658 RECIPIENT OF SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTS AWARD FOR THE NEXT STEP ................659 EXCELLENCE N AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION SILVER GAVEL AWARD INTELLIGENT DESIGN CQ Researcher July 29, 2005 THE ISSUES OUTLOOK Volume 15, Number 27 • Is intelligent design a Surviving the Courts MANAGING EDITOR: Thomas J. Colin 639 scientific theory? 655 Intelligent design is expected • Can a person believe in to win future court victories. ASSISTANT MANAGING EDITOR: Kathy Koch evolution and still believe ASSOCIATE EDITOR: Kenneth Jost in God? STAFF WRITERS: Marcia Clemmitt, Peter Katel, • Should public-school sci- SIDEBARS AND GRAPHICS Pamela M. Prah ence classes “teach the con- Anti-Evolution Measures CONTRIBUTING WRITERS: Sarah Glazer, troversy” surrounding evolu- 640 Several are being considered. David Hosansky, Patrick Marshall, tion and intelligent design? Tom Price Majority Supports Teaching DESIGN/PRODUCTION EDITOR: Olu B. Davis BACKGROUND 641 All Theories Many Americans say evolution, ASSISTANT EDITOR: Melissa J. Hipolit Modern Science creationism and intelligent de- 646 In the early-19th century, sign all should be taught. scholars developed a new approach to studying nature. The Case for Evolution 642 Biologists cite numerous Voyage to Evolution types of evidence. 648 Charles Darwin shipped A Division of Chronology Congressional Quarterly Inc. out on the H.M.S. Beagle 647 Key events since 1800. at age 22. SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT/GENERAL MANAGER: 648 Phillip Johnson’s Campaign John A. Jenkins Darwin and God Against Darwinism DIRECTOR, LIBRARY PUBLISHING: Kathryn C. Suárez 650 Darwin was torn about The founder of the intelligent- the existence of a Creator. design movement predicts DIRECTOR, EDITORIAL OPERATIONS: Jesus will prevail. Ann Davies Creation on Trial CONGRESSIONAL QUARTERLY INC. 651 The first court test of a Intelligent-Design Advocates 652 CHAIRMAN: Paul C. Tash law barring teaching evo- Turn to Math They seek a formula explain- VICE CHAIRMAN: Andrew P. Corty lution came in 1925 in ing complex structures. Tennessee. PRESIDENT AND PUBLISHER: Robert W. Merry At Issue Copyright © 2005 CQ Press, a division of Congres- 653 Should public schools “teach CURRENT SITUATION the controversy” surrounding sional Quarterly Inc. (CQ). CQ reserves all copyright evolution and intelligent design? and other rights herein, unless previously specified Abandoning Genesis in writing. No part of this publication may be re- 651 In the early 1990s, anti- produced electronically or otherwise, without prior FOR FURTHER RESEARCH written permission. Unauthorized reproduction or evolutionists began to transmission of CQ copyrighted material is a violation play down the biblical of federal law carrying civil fines of up to $100,000. creation story. For More Information 657 Organizations to contact. CQ Researcher (ISSN 1056-2036) is printed on acid- Science Redefined free paper. Published weekly, except March 25, July 654 Bibliography 1, July 8, Aug. 5, Aug. 12, Nov. 25, Dec. 23 and Dec. Many schools require 658 Selected sources used. teaching criticism of 30, by CQ Press, a division of Congressional Quarter- evolution. ly Inc. Annual subscription rates for institutions start 659 The Next Step at $625. For pricing, call 1-800-834-9020, ext. 1906. Additional articles. To purchase a CQ Researcher report in print or elec- Battle in Kansas tronic format (PDF), visit www.cqpress.com or call 654 Citing The CQ Researcher Kansas anti-evolutionists are 659 866-427-7737. A single report is $10. Bulk purchase pursuing a new strategy. Sample bibliography formats. discounts and electronic-rights licensing are also available. Periodicals postage paid at Washington, D.C., and additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to CQ Researcher, 1255 22nd Cover: Believers in intelligent design see evidence of a higher power in such complex natural St., N.W., Suite 400, Washington, DC 20037. systems as the double helix structure of DNA. (Corbis Images/Steve Allen) 638 The CQ Researcher Intelligent Design BY MARCIA CLEMMITT versity of California law pro- fessor who launched the in- THE ISSUES telligent-design movement in he word “science” will the early 1990s. 4 (See side- have a new meaning bar, p. 648.) Johnson’s strat- T in Kansas if the state egy worries Michael Ruse, a School Board has its way in professor of philosophy at September. Under a new de- Florida State University. “As finition the board is expect- far as the scientific commu- ed to adopt, the teaching of nity is concerned . intelli- science in Kansas classrooms gent design is religion tarted will include supernatural ex- up to look like science to get planations for natural phe- around the U.S. Constitution,” nomena. Ruse said. Intelligent-design Under the new definition, advocates are “being pushed biology teachers will be re- by people with a much more quired to discuss alternatives right-wing agenda.” 5 to Charles Darwin’s theory of Focusing on intelligent de- evolution, such as intelligent sign instead of creationism has design — the idea that hu- enabled evolution opponents mans were purposely de- to turn the effort to ban or signed by a higher intelli- limit evolution teaching into a gence. nationwide battle. While only The changes will be a sig- Kansas has passed legislation nificant victory for John Calvert suggesting that alternatives to — a retired lawyer and evolution be taught, anti-evo- founder of the Kansas-based Smith Getty Images/Larry W. lution bills are pending or have Intelligent Design Network, John Calvert’s Intelligent Design Network is pushing the been considered in at least 16 which pushed for the new Kansas Board of Education to require teachers to discuss states. (See map, p. 640.) definition. In Calvert’s view, alternatives to Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, such And this year, serious chal- as intelligent design — the idea that life was designed by there is substantial evidence a higher intelligence. Kansas is the only state that has lenges to teaching evolution that living things were actu- passed legislation suggesting that alternatives to evolution in public schools have arisen ally designed by an intelligent be taught, but anti-evolution measures are pending or in such traditionally liberal being, and the “Evidence have been considered in at least 16 states, including states as Michigan, New York, should not be censored,” he Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. told CNN. 1 “I used to call it a glass But most scientists say no such ev- clusion of alternative ideas, such as Bible- wall,” says Larry Scharmann, a profes- idence exists. “In the scientific com- based creationism, which holds that sor of science education at Kansas State munity, evolution is an accepted fact,” God created all the species on Earth University, referring to the invisible wall said Alan Leshner, CEO of the Amer- just as they are. In the past decade, that once separated the Midwest from ican Association for the Advancement however, many evolution opponents the fervent religious lobbying in South- of Science (AAAS), the world’s largest have stopped raising religious issues di- ern states where evolution was driven scientific organization. 2 rectly, arguing instead that there is as out of the biology curriculum. “Now I “Without evolution, the building will much evidence of intelligent design as say, ‘How did it happen here?’ ” fall down. It’s the cornerstone of bi- there is that humans evolved naturally. Although rising religious conser- ology,” said Al Frisby, a biology teacher “Our strategy has been to change vatism helps explain evolution oppo- at Shawnee Mission Northwest High the subject a bit so that we can get nents’ recent success, Americans’ School. 3 intelligent design — which really sense of fair play — which demands Conservative Christians have long tried means the reality of God — before the that alternate ideas also are
Recommended publications
  • Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals

    Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals

    UNDERSTANDING THE INTELLIGENT DESIGN CREATIONIST MOVEMENT: ITS TRUE NATURE AND GOALS A POSITION PAPER FROM THE CENTER FOR INQUIRY OFFICE OF PUBLIC POLICY AUTHOR: BARBARA FORREST, Ph.D. Reviewing Committee: Paul Kurtz, Ph.D.; Austin Dacey, Ph.D.; Stuart D. Jordan, Ph.D.; Ronald A. Lindsay, J. D., Ph.D.; John Shook, Ph.D.; Toni Van Pelt DATED: MAY 2007 ( AMENDED JULY 2007) Copyright © 2007 Center for Inquiry, Inc. Permission is granted for this material to be shared for noncommercial, educational purposes, provided that this notice appears on the reproduced materials, the full authoritative version is retained, and copies are not altered. To disseminate otherwise or to republish requires written permission from the Center for Inquiry, Inc. Table of Contents Section I. Introduction: What is at stake in the dispute over intelligent design?.................. 1 Section II. What is the intelligent design creationist movement? ........................................ 2 Section III. The historical and legal background of intelligent design creationism ................ 6 Epperson v. Arkansas (1968) ............................................................................ 6 McLean v. Arkansas (1982) .............................................................................. 6 Edwards v. Aguillard (1987) ............................................................................. 7 Section IV. The ID movement’s aims and strategy .............................................................. 9 The “Wedge Strategy” .....................................................................................
  • 1 Seeing and Believing the Never-Ending Attempt to Reconcile

    1 Seeing and Believing the Never-Ending Attempt to Reconcile

    1 Seeing and Believing The never-ending attempt to reconcile science and religion, and why it is doomed to fail. Jerry A. Coyne, The New Republic Published: Wednesday, February 04, 2009 Saving Darwin: How to be a Christian and Believe in Evolution By Karl W. Giberson (HarperOne, 248 pp., $24.95) Only A Theory: Evolution and the Battle for America's Soul By Kenneth R. Miller (Viking, 244 pp., $25.95) I. Charles Darwin was born on February 12, 1809--the same day as Abraham Lincoln--and published his magnum opus, On the Origin of Species, fifty years later. Every half century, then, a Darwin Year comes around: an occasion to honor his theory of evolution by natural selection, which is surely the most important concept in biology, and perhaps the most revolutionary scientific idea in history. 2009 is such a year, and we biologists are preparing to fan out across the land, giving talks and attending a multitude of DarwinFests. The melancholy part is that we will be speaking more to other scientists than to the American public. For in this country, Darwin is a man of low repute. The ideas that made Darwin's theory so revolutionary are precisely the ones that repel much of religious America, for they imply that, far from having a divinely scripted role in the drama of life, our species is the accidental and contingent result of a purely natural process. And so the culture wars continue between science and religion. On one side we have a scientific establishment and a court system determined to let children learn evolution rather than religious mythology, and on the other side the many Americans who passionately resist those efforts.
  • Ron Numbers Collection-- the Creationists

    Ron Numbers Collection-- the Creationists

    Register of the Ron Numbers Collection-- The Creationists Collection 178 Center for Adventist Research James White Library Andrews University Berrien Springs, Michigan 49104-1400 1992, revised 2007 Ron Numbers Collection--The Creationists (Collection 178) Scope and Content This collection contains the records used as resource material for the production of Dr. Numbers' book, The Creationists, published in 1992. This book documents the development of the creationist movement in the face of the growing tide of evolution. The bulk of the collection dates from the 20th century and covers most of the prominent, individual creationists and pro-creation groups of the late 19th and 20th century primarily in the United States, and secondarily, those in England, Australia, and Canada. Among the types of records included are photocopies of articles and other publications, theses, interview tapes and transcripts, and official publications of various denominations. One of the more valuable contributions of this collection is the large quantity of correspondence of prominent individuals. These records are all photocopies. A large section contains documentation related to Seventh-day Adventist creationists. Adventists were some of the leading figures in the creationist movement, and foremost among this group is George McCready Price. The Adventist Heritage Center holds a Price collection. The Numbers collection contributes additional correspondence and other documentation related to Price. Arrangement Ron Numbers organized this collection for the purpose of preparing his book manuscript, though the book itself is not organized in this way. Dr. Numbers suggested his original arrangement be retained. While the collection is arranged in its original order, the outline that follows may be of help to some researchers.
  • Intelligent Design: Is It Really Worth It?

    Intelligent Design: Is It Really Worth It?

    Leaven Volume 17 Issue 2 Theology and Science Article 6 1-1-2009 Intelligent Design: Is It Really Worth It? Chris Doran [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven Part of the Biblical Studies Commons, Christianity Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Doran, Chris (2009) "Intelligent Design: Is It Really Worth It?," Leaven: Vol. 17 : Iss. 2 , Article 6. Available at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/leaven/vol17/iss2/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Religion at Pepperdine Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Leaven by an authorized editor of Pepperdine Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]. Doran: Intelligent Design: Is It Really Worth It? Intelligent Design: Is It Really Worth It? CHRIS DORAN imaginethatwe have all had occasion to look up into the sky on a clear night, gaze at the countless stars, and think about how small we are in comparison to the enormity of the universe. For everyone except Ithe most strident atheist (although I suspect that even s/he has at one point considered the same feeling), staring into space can be a stark reminder that the universe is much grander than we could ever imagine, which may cause us to contemplate who or what might have put this universe together. For believers, looking up at tJotestars often puts us into the same spirit of worship that must have filled the psalmist when he wrote, "The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands" (Psalms 19.1).
  • Intelligent Design Is Not Science” Given by John G

    Intelligent Design Is Not Science” Given by John G

    An Outline of a lecture entitled, “Intelligent Design is not Science” given by John G. Wise in the Spring Semester of 2007: Slide 1 Why… … do humans have so much trouble with wisdom teeth? … is childbirth so dangerous and painful? Because a big, thinking brain is an advantage, and evolution is imperfect. Slide 2 Charles Darwin’s Revolutionary Idea His book changed the world. All life forms on this planet are related to each other through “Descent with modification over generations from a common ancestor”. Natural processes fully explain the biological connections between all life on the planet. Slide 3 Darwin’s Idea is Dangerous (from the book of the same title by Daniel Dennett) If we have evolution, we no longer need a Creator to create each and every species. Darwinism is dangerous because it infers that God did not directly and purposefully create us. It simply states that we evolved. Slide 4 Intelligent Design Attempts to Counter Darwin “Intelligent Design” has been proposed as way out of this dilemma. – Phillip Johnson, William Dembski, and Michael Behe (to name a few). They attempt to redefine science to encompass the supernatural as well as the natural world. They accept Darwin’s evolution, if an Intelligent Designer is (sometimes) substituted for natural selection. Design arguments are not new: − 1250 - St. Thomas Aquinas - first design argument − 1802 - Natural Theology - William Paley – perhaps the best(?) design argument Slide 5 What is Science? A specific way of understanding the natural world. Based on the idea that our senses give us accurate information about the Universe.
  • Where Did We Come From?

    Where Did We Come From?

    Reading 10.2 Where Did We Come From? Lottie L. Joiner or a year, Martha Wise listened to presentations, vis- investigate and critically analyze all aspects of evolutionary ited constituents’ homes, took phone call after long theory.” The statement made Ohio the first state to require F phone call, and spent hours answering e-mail. She districts to let criticisms of evolution be examine din class- was often up until the wee hours of the morning, trying to rooms. However, a disclaimer insists that the board did not understand the latest issue dividing her state: the teaching support “the teaching or testing of intelligent design,”a the- of “intelligent design,” one of the alternative theories of the ory that the complex features of life are the result of intelli- origin of species. gent planning and activity. “I’m not a scientist. I don’t know much about science,” For many, it was a compromise that satisfied both sides. says Wise, a member of the Ohio State Board of Education. Some felt that it was not enough. Others believed that the “There’s nothing the intelligent design people showed me Ohio board had caved to the pressure of Darwin’s critics. that the science people couldn’t say,‘That’s not evidence,’or “Science education has not convinced a lot of ‘That’s not a fact.’ I can’t refute them because I don’t know Americans that Darwin was right,”says Charles Haynes, se- that much about it. I can’t believe either side.” nior scholar at the Freedom Forum’s first amendment The question of which side you believe is central to the Center, based at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn.
  • Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution

    Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Washington University St. Louis: Open Scholarship Washington University Law Review Volume 83 Issue 1 2005 Is It Science Yet?: Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution Matthew J. Brauer Princeton University Barbara Forrest Southeastern Louisiana University Steven G. Gey Florida State University Follow this and additional works at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Education Law Commons, First Amendment Commons, Religion Law Commons, and the Science and Technology Law Commons Recommended Citation Matthew J. Brauer, Barbara Forrest, and Steven G. Gey, Is It Science Yet?: Intelligent Design Creationism and the Constitution, 83 WASH. U. L. Q. 1 (2005). Available at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview/vol83/iss1/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School at Washington University Open Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington University Law Review by an authorized administrator of Washington University Open Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Washington University Law Quarterly VOLUME 83 NUMBER 1 2005 IS IT SCIENCE YET?: INTELLIGENT DESIGN CREATIONISM AND THE CONSTITUTION MATTHEW J. BRAUER BARBARA FORREST STEVEN G. GEY* TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................................................... 3 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................
  • The Design Argument

    The Design Argument

    The design argument The different versions of the cosmological argument we discussed over the last few weeks were arguments for the existence of God based on extremely abstract and general features of the universe, such as the fact that some things come into existence, and that there are some contingent things. The argument we’ll be discussing today is not like this. The basic idea of the argument is that if we pay close attention to the details of the universe in which we live, we’ll be able to see that that universe must have been created by an intelligent designer. This design argument, or, as its sometimes called, the teleological argument, has probably been the most influential argument for the existence of God throughout most of history. You will by now not be surprised that a version of the teleological argument can be found in the writings of Thomas Aquinas. You will by now not be surprised that a version of the teleological argument can be found in the writings of Thomas Aquinas. Aquinas is noting that things we observe in nature, like plants and animals, typically act in ways which are advantageous to themselves. Think, for example, of the way that many plants grow in the direction of light. Clearly, as Aquinas says, plants don’t do this because they know where the light is; as he says, they “lack knowledge.” But then how do they manage this? What does explain the fact that plants grow in the direction of light, if not knowledge? Aquinas’ answer to this question is that they must be “directed to their end” -- i.e., designed to be such as to grow toward the light -- by God.
  • Eugenie Scott

    Eugenie Scott

    Expert Witness Statement by Eugenie C. Scott Contents: 1. Qualifications as an Expert Witness 2. The Nature of Science 3. The Scientific Meaning of “Theory” and “Fact” 4. History of the Creationism/Evolution Controversy Definitions: evolution, creationism, creation science Fundamentalism; Banning Evolution Creation Science “Evidence Against Evolution” and Creation Science Evolution of Creation Science Into Intelligent Design “Theory Not Fact” Policies Are Promoted By Creationists to Denigrate Evolution and Advance Creationism 5. History of Creationism in Georgia 6. History of Creationism in Cobb County 7. “Theory Not Fact” Policies are Pedagogically Harmful Respectfully submitted: Date: November 17, 2006 _________________________ Eugenie C. Scott, Ph.D., D.Sc. 420 40th St #2 Oakland, CA 94609 1. Qualifications My name is Eugenie C. Scott. My curriculum vitae is attached to this Declaration as Exhibit A. I have a Ph.D. in physical anthropology from the University of Missouri and honorary doctorates (D.Sc.) from McGill University, Ohio State University, and Mt. Holyoke College. In December 2006, I will receive an honorary doctorate from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, and in May 2007, from Rutgers University. I am the Executive Director of the National Center for Science Education (NCSE) in Oakland, California. NCSE is a nonprofit membership organization of scientists and others that defends the teaching of evolution in the public schools. NCSE is affiliated with the American Association for the Advancement of Science. The NCSE monitors the creationism/evolution controversy and maintains an archive of information on the recent history of the controversy, including materials relevant to the history of the creationism/evolution controversy in Cobb County.
  • 1 Big History, the Big Bang, and the Big Book: the History of Science

    1 Big History, the Big Bang, and the Big Book: the History of Science

    Big History, the Big Bang, and the Big Book: The History of Science Meets the Tradition of Christianity Course Context In the 1980s, historian David Christian embarked on a delightfully daring journey: to narrate the entire history of the world from its origins to the present. Ignoring the sacred cow of academic specialization, in which academics are only encouraged to speak about their immediate areas of intellectual concentration, Christian coined the term “Big History” to refer to the history of the cosmos in all of its fourteen-billion years of glory. Even though he was an Australian historian of Russia, with little formal training in science, Christian began teaching history in a way that no one had quite done before. As David Christian was attempting to understand the evolution of history across fourteen billion years, many conservative Christians were actively vilifying the consensus of scientists when it came to the age of the universe, the age of earth, and the origins of human life. Kenneth Ham, an Australian like David Christian who is also around the same age, is at the forefront of creationist apologetics. Ham founded the Creation Museum and he is president of a highly influential organization that teaches young-earth creationism and rejects the methodologies and assumptions of mainstream science. Who is right, David Christian or Ken Ham? And what difference does it make anyway? Course Description In Big History, the Big Bang, and the Big Book, we will explore the intersection between the history of mainstream science and the beliefs of evangelical Christianity. As we look at each of the major branches of science, we will do so with an eye toward understanding how it impacts the thought and practice of Protestant evangelicalism.
  • Distinguishing Science from Philosophy: a Critical Assessment of Thomas Nagel's Recommendation for Public Education Melissa Lammey

    Distinguishing Science from Philosophy: a Critical Assessment of Thomas Nagel's Recommendation for Public Education Melissa Lammey

    Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2012 Distinguishing Science from Philosophy: A Critical Assessment of Thomas Nagel's Recommendation for Public Education Melissa Lammey Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected] THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS & SCIENCES DISTINGUISHING SCIENCE FROM PHILOSOPHY: A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF THOMAS NAGEL’S RECOMMENDATION FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION By MELISSA LAMMEY A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Philosophy in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Degree Awarded: Spring Semester, 2012 Melissa Lammey defended this dissertation on February 10, 2012. The members of the supervisory committee were: Michael Ruse Professor Directing Dissertation Sherry Southerland University Representative Justin Leiber Committee Member Piers Rawling Committee Member The Graduate School has verified and approved the above-named committee members, and certifies that the dissertation has been approved in accordance with university requirements. ii For Warren & Irene Wilson iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS It is my pleasure to acknowledge the contributions of Michael Ruse to my academic development. Without his direction, this dissertation would not have been possible and I am indebted to him for his patience, persistence, and guidance. I would also like to acknowledge the efforts of Sherry Southerland in helping me to learn more about science and science education and for her guidance throughout this project. In addition, I am grateful to Piers Rawling and Justin Leiber for their service on my committee. I would like to thank Stephen Konscol for his vital and continuing support.
  • 1. Name: Kenneth R

    1. Name: Kenneth R

    1. Name: Kenneth R. Miller Professor of Biology Department of Molecular Biology, Cell Biology, & Biochemistry 2. Home address: 142 Martin Street Rehoboth, MA 02769 3. Education: Brown University Sc. B. Biology 1970 University of Colorado Ph. D. Biology 1974 Dissertation topic: Structure of the Photosynthetic Membrane 4. Professional Appointments: Lecturer Harvard Univ. 1974-1976 Assistant Professor Harvard Univ. 1976-1980 Assistant Professor Brown Univ. 1980-1982 Associate Professor Brown Univ. 1982-1986 Professor Brown Univ. 1986- 5. Completed Publications a. Books & Monographs Miller, K. R. (editor) Advances in Cell Biology, Volume I. JAI Press, Greenwich, Conn., London, England. 1987. pp. 1-190.g Miller, K. R. (editor) Advances in Cell Biology, Volume II. JAI Press, Greenwich, Conn., London, England. 1988. pp. 1-312. Miller, K. R. (1988) Energy and The Cell. (A Carolina Biology Reader, J. J. Head, editor) Carolina Biological, Burlington, North Carolina. 16 pp. Miller, K. R. (editor) Advances in Cell Biology, Volume III. JAI Press, Greenwich, Conn., London, England. 1989. pp. 1-273. Miller, K. R., & J. S. Levine (1990) Biology. (A high school biology text, generally known as the “Elephant” book). 1st Edition. Prentice Hall Co. 1077 p. (© 1991). CV: Kenneth R. Miller (Updated through 2016) Page 1 Levine, J. S., & K. R. Miller (1990) Biology: Discovering Life (A college biology text) 1st Edition. D. C. Heath & Co. 839 pp. (© 1991). Miller, K. R., & J. S. Levine (1992) Biology. (revision of the “Elephant” book). 2nd Edition. Prentice Hall Co. 1077 p. (© 1993). Levine, J. S., & K. R. Miller (1993) Biology: Discovering Life (A college biology text) 2nd Edition.