Stand up for REAL science. Critically analyze ALL theories.
Teach the ACTUAL Controversies.
Critically Analyze ALL Theories.
BLOG

Attention: The URL for this blog has changed.
It can now be found here: http://www.anevolvingcreation.net/standup/
REAL Science Blog

REAL Science Home

Contact Webmaster

Link to This Website

RSS Feed


Our YouTube Channel


Read this FREE online!




Wednesday, July 16, 2008
"Get Rid of Darwinism"

Olivia Judson in yesterday's New York Times:

I'd like to abolish the insidious terms Darwinism, Darwinist and Darwinian. They suggest a false narrowness to the field of modern evolutionary biology, as though it was the brainchild of a single person 150 years ago, rather than a vast, complex and evolving subject to which many other great figures have contributed. (The science would be in a sorry state if one man 150 years ago had, in fact, discovered everything there was to say.) Obsessively focusing on Darwin, perpetually asking whether he was right about this or that, implies that the discovery of something he didn't think of or know about somehow undermines or threatens the whole enterprise of evolutionary biology today.

The Discovery Institute's Wedge Document makes brilliant use of this tactic. Calling evolutionary biology "Darwinism" casts science as an ideology rather than a process of discovery. It belittles scientists as mere unthinking worshipers of a very mortal Darwin. It also labels the users of that term as scientifically illiterate, in that few scientists themselves refer to the modern evolutionary theory as "Darwinism."

Darwin was an amazing man, and the principal founder of evolutionary biology. But his was the first major statement on the subject, not the last. Calling evolutionary biology "Darwinism," and evolution by natural selection "Darwinian" evolution, is like calling aeronautical engineering "Wrightism," and fixed-wing aircraft "Wrightian" planes, after those pioneers of fixed-wing flight, the Wright brothers. The best tribute we could give Darwin is to call him the founder - and leave it at that. Plenty of people in history have had an -ism named after them. Only a handful can claim truly to have given birth to an entire field of modern science.

The entire piece would make an excellent exercise in analysis for high school students.

Time to take a break and do some lesson planning. You know, find more effective ways to teach Newtonism, Galileonism, Kirchoffism, Rayleighism, Wegnerism, Maxwellism, Thomsonism, Bohrism . . .



posted by Cheryl Shepherd-Adams



<< Home | Is there such a thing as a stupid question? >> | Missing the Wrist, Dissing the Rest >> | Intelligent Falling Redux >> | REAL Science: Evolution of Flatfish >> | Map Change >> | Candidates show their colors >> | Defusing the Religion Issue . . . Again >> | How REAL science gets done >> | America's Founding Creationists? Not. Hardly. >> | Showdown in Texas: Christina Comer Sues the TEA >>


Archives
December 2007  
January 2008  
February 2008  
March 2008  
April 2008  
May 2008  
June 2008  
July 2008  
August 2008  
September 2008  
October 2008  
November 2008  
December 2008  
January 2009  
February 2009  
March 2009  
April 2009  
May 2009  
June 2009  
July 2009  
August 2009  
September 2009  
October 2009  
November 2009  
December 2009  
January 2010  
February 2010  

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Blog Contributors

What is REAL science?




Disclaimer:
The thoughts and opinions expressed on this blog are solely our own. They do not necessarily represent the views of our employers or any other organization with which we are affiliated.

Comment Policy:
One of the goals of this website is to foster constructive dialogue concerning science and science education. Comments not in line with this goal may be deleted.

Our Visitors:

Scientific criticism originates within the scientific literature, not outside of it.
© Jeremy Mohn, 2006