Evolution as a theory

An article in today’s online edition of the New York Times reporting on a controversy in the Utah legislature over how evolution should be taught mentions that there is pending legislation in Missouri which would require “critical thinking’ in the teaching of evolution. Two thoughts to share on this:

- First, the irony of this twisted logic is truly funny, that is, if it weren’t so tragic. The creationists --- oh, excuse me, they want to be called intelligent design folks these days --- like to argue that the Theory of Evolution is not fact. Right, sure, OK, tell me something I didn’t already know. The THEORY of Evolution is just that, a theory. A theory is a hypothesis, is a speculation, is a proposition put forth to try to explain or to make sense out of the things we see around us. A “theory” is never “proven,” it is only supported by evidence. If new evidence supports a theory, then the credibility the theory is enhanced and we continue to use it to understand our world. If new evidence contradicts (does not support) an existing theory, then perhaps the theory needs to be reevaluated. This process I am describing is, of course, the Scientific Method that was articulated by Newton some four centuries ago and has been the foundation for Western education ever since. The Scientific Method and critical thinking are virtually synonymous. So, for the Missouri Legislature to require critical thinking in the teaching of evolution is essentially to require what most science teachers have been doing all along.

- Second, so if “critical thinking” is good enough for the Theory of Evolution, then wouldn’t it also be good enough for the Theory of Intelligent Design? Except that no creationist that I know of --- or rather, no intelligent design proponent --- is willing to admit that it is a theory in the first place, since they hold that it is an incontrovertible fact established by the Bible (i.e., God). Which then makes it a religious proposition, not a scientific one.

So, here’s my suggestion to the Creationists / Intelligent Design folks. Be careful what you wish for or you just might get it. Go ahead and pass your legislation requiring the Theory of Evolution to be taught not as fact, but as a theory. If I were a science teacher I’d be happy to teach that, since it is essentially what I’ve been teaching anyway. But what if I then take that mandate and also apply it to your Creation / Intelligent Design theory in my classes? What if I were to ask my students to apply the same mandated critical thinking to Creation / Intelligent Design that you’ve required me to apply to evolution? Can you imagine the brouhaha that would ensue…

Here’s an assignment for you folks you think you can legislate thought: Do some research on the Law of Unintended Consequences.