Now that Twitter and Facebook have been invented, I don’t usually put up blog posts that simply link to someone else’s posts. (Although I wonder if that policy is a mistake.) But this morning I put up a link to a post at Jerry Coyne’s blog, and it was almost immediately deleted from Facebook. (The Twitter entry was fine, of course.) I wouldn’t even have known, except that someone commented that it had been “flagged as inappropriate by Facebook users.”
Of course, Facebook being Facebook, I have no idea whether this is a nefarious conspiracy or simple incompetence. Probably both. In any event, you should go check out the post, which comments on this YouTube video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkBmhM0R2A0
It’s a compilation of the answers given by contestants in the Miss USA contest to a simple question: “Should evolution be taught in schools?” Miss California, Alyssa Campanella, who eventually won the contest, gave a strong pro-science answer that will bring a smile to your face. At least, if you are finished crying and throwing objects at your computer monitor after seeing some of the other answers. Due to the vagaries of alphabetical order, Miss Alabama comes first, and it’s not pretty.
For the most part, the contestants are interested in being good politicians and keeping everybody happy, not in staking out courageous stances in the science/religion debates. But that’s exactly what’s so depressing: here we are, in the most advanced country in the world (albeit in its waning years), and it’s considered controversial whether we should teach science to our children. The question wasn’t even “should we teach creationism,” which is actually a harder issue (although still very easy). It was just whether we should teach straightforward science at all. Very sad indeed.
I’m not sure what ‘anything’ you refer to when you say my argument can be used to justify anything. About the only thing I can think of that the argument could also be used to justify is an avoidance of teaching around sexuality and tolerance of differing sexuality in high school. However my argument for the avoidance of evolution relies on the fact that there is no practical benefit to learning about evolution, whereas learning about sexuality can reduce unwanted pregnancy, reduce discrimination, sexual diseases etc.
@Michael: Phillip’s point is this: If telling students nothing about evolution is the best way to educate them about evolution, why not tell them nothing about every subject? Why have schools at all?
Your argument, as I understand it, is that you’re glad that no one tried to teach you evolution until you were prepared for the challenge to your existing beliefs. But in that argument, you’re acknowledging that you cannot educate people without challenging their beliefs. Having your beliefs challenged is healthy, and a vital part of any real education. However, there’s a big gap between ‘evolution happens’ and ‘religion is stupid’. The majority of Americans believe the first and not the second. We can, and should, teach evolution to every student without spitting on religion. Challenging a belief in literal creationism is not the same as challenging religion as a whole.
We teach children about science because science produces great insights about how our world works. Understanding life on Earth is important, and you can’t fully understand life on Earth without understanding evolution. It is good to avoid unwanted pregnancy and STDs, but there is more to life than that.