Saturday, January 07, 2006
The Sounds of Silence
.
Glenn Branch, deputy director of the National Center for Science Education, properly points out that it isn't the label that counts. The question, following the clear demonstration of ID's real nature at Dover, is whether this ultimately religious proposition is being governmentally endorsed as a scientific alternative to evolutionary theory.
There are certainly signs that raise concern. Apparently the teacher had actually arranged for three ID proponents to speak at the class but still listed a speaker for evolution (Francis Crick) who had been dead for a year, making it doubtful she made any real effort to have a balanced presentation. Similarly, the original course plan included 24 videos, out of which 19 supported intelligent design. And, strangely for a philosophy course taught by a social studies teacher, it supposedly covers such arcane scientific subjects as the laws of thermodynamics and how fossil dating works. It is almost an afterthought, then, to note that the teacher is married to an Assembly of God pastor.
This may be the next wave of creationist obfuscation and evasion we have been waiting to see after Judge Jones' body blow to ID. Courses labeled "philosophy" or "social studies" or "current events" that consist of nothing more than the arguments from Of Pandas and People or Icons of Evolution, stripped of even the open association with those works, may be the coming refuge of the IDeologists.
In a way, it is very sad to contemplate believing in a stealth religion or, as the title of Jerry Coyne's article put it, "The Faith That Dare Not Speak Its Name".
The Associated Press has a story by Juliana Barbassa about what may be the next development in the evolution of anti-evolutionism. Frazier Mountain High School in Lebec, California is offering what purports to be a philosophy course that discusses Intelligent Design.
"It's really just a philosophy class," said John Wight, superintendent of El Tejon Unified School District. "We don't take a position."
But some in the town of 1,285 perched in the Tehachapi mountains dividing the agricultural Central Valley from Los Angeles, about 75 miles south, wonder if the "Philosophy of Design" course is a sneaky way to introduce the theory that living things are so complex they must have been designed by a higher being.
Now, I've said before that ID could be Constitutionally taught in a public school philosophy course. There is no need for a "a sneaky way to introduce the theory that living things are so complex they must have been designed by a higher being," as that is a long-standing philosophical proposition. But, as always, the devil is in the details.
Glenn Branch, deputy director of the National Center for Science Education, properly points out that it isn't the label that counts. The question, following the clear demonstration of ID's real nature at Dover, is whether this ultimately religious proposition is being governmentally endorsed as a scientific alternative to evolutionary theory.
There are certainly signs that raise concern. Apparently the teacher had actually arranged for three ID proponents to speak at the class but still listed a speaker for evolution (Francis Crick) who had been dead for a year, making it doubtful she made any real effort to have a balanced presentation. Similarly, the original course plan included 24 videos, out of which 19 supported intelligent design. And, strangely for a philosophy course taught by a social studies teacher, it supposedly covers such arcane scientific subjects as the laws of thermodynamics and how fossil dating works. It is almost an afterthought, then, to note that the teacher is married to an Assembly of God pastor.
This may be the next wave of creationist obfuscation and evasion we have been waiting to see after Judge Jones' body blow to ID. Courses labeled "philosophy" or "social studies" or "current events" that consist of nothing more than the arguments from Of Pandas and People or Icons of Evolution, stripped of even the open association with those works, may be the coming refuge of the IDeologists.
In a way, it is very sad to contemplate believing in a stealth religion or, as the title of Jerry Coyne's article put it, "The Faith That Dare Not Speak Its Name".
.
