I am a science teacher, and I spent years learning about how the world around us functions. I am also a Mormon, and I've spent my whole life trying to gain a personal understanding of how God functions.
In about a month I'll begin teaching my students about evolution. I will give them the evidence scientists have found over the years and I'll encourage them to research the information for themselves. I will not be teaching creationism.
Even though it confuses me (and frustrates me when they speak out against evolution), I have no problem with people who believe in Creationism. If you have your facts straight and you still choose to not believe, go on with your bad self. I don't care. My problem is when you try to force it into school curriculum.
See, scientists are not content with "I don't know." One of their biggest goals in life is to better understand how something works; whether it's the transcription and translation of DNA, the reasons behind earthquakes, or how fast a feather will fall, they strive to learn more. It goes against their nature to say, "this happens because of unknown forces that we can never understand." If I'm trying to teach my students the nature of science, why would I ever say, "here's the evidence we have, but there's also the option of going back in time before you knew any of this and just saying we have no idea how it works?"
From my experience, that is pretty much what Creationism is. A whole lot of "I don't know, and I don't care to find out," all because they're okay with keeping the workings of God a mystery.
Isn't that kind of against what God wants for us though? We read the scriptures and pray in order to better understand the mysteries of God. The leaders of the LDS church encourage us to go out and get as much education as we can so that we can better understand the mysteries of God. We're supposed to be hungry for information, not content with a lack of understanding.
On top of that, how would you feel is scientists treated everything that way? "Oh, cancer. Yeah, we're not sure how that works. We're pretty sure it's just a punishment." "Volcanic eruptions? There are no signs to prepare you for those. Nobody knows when God is going to make a volcano erupt." "Angels fly; I'm pretty sure physics is just a philosophical discussion." It just doesn't make sense to me. Creationism is not a science, and it has no place in a science classroom.
And to close, some Avatar:
So I'm not being critical, but I don't understand. Is not believing in creationism believing God didn't create the earth? Or maybe I just don't understand what it means - is just denying any sort of.evolution? I remember a great packet I read in biology about the stance of the church and evolution. I'm just curious what different stances are, and what creationism really is. :)
ReplyDelete@ Katie- what sort of biology classes offer a packet detailing a church's stance on evolution? That seems bizarrely medieval and highly out of place in any institution of higher learning. And I think the writer here is refering to creationism of the fundamentalist sort: the Earth is six thousand years old and dinosaurs didn't live here, et cetera. But yes, there are many, many people who believe that the Earth was created by a god who used evolution as a method. Most of those people do not take the Bible literally but, rather, as a best understanding based on the information to be had at the time. Faith and evolution never need to be mutually exclusive.
ReplyDeleteSome other people, like myself, feel that anyone who wants the benefits of science and/or wants to study science must learn the rules of the discipline. The scientific community has mutually accepted ways of measuring and analyzing the natural world and those ways lead to great medicine, research, discovery, and invention. If you don't want to be a part of the scientific community with everything that entails (in this instance, the evidence for evolution) that's fine. But when the same laws that lead to theories for evolution lead to the medicine you take every day and you still want to deny it while reaping the benefits.........that strikes some of us as hypocritical.
Way to go, Teach, by refusing to incorporate faith-based ideologies in a science class. The world needs people like you--of faith or not of faith--to keep evidence based theories and faith-based theories separate. If there is any god who disapproves of that standard, it is not a god I can respect.
Well, anonymous, it was a biology class at BYU, a religious university, where people do wonder about our Church's stance on evolution is, and it is a wonderful packet that is mainly full of quotes and talks from leaders and scientists in our church. So no, I don't believe it was wrong, mideveil, or our of place. If you don't realize this, BYU is a private, religious university where the primary demographic are members of the LDS faith.
ReplyDeleteAnd I never said I don't believe in evolution, but I certainly believe in God. I don't believe they have to be mutually exclusive.
Katie, there's actually a spectrum of Creationism; Anonymous was correct in assuming that in this blog post I'm referring to creationists like this: http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/messages-from-creationists-to-people-who-believe-in-evolutio who take the evidence we've gathered over the years and throw it out the window (and obviously don't understand the laws of thermodynamics). My personal stance is one that Anonymous referred to: I believe that God used evolution as a tool.
ReplyDelete