8 ms·

Creationism Banned from Science Classes by Scottish Government

110 points by mirceasoaica 11y ago

noir-york 11y ago
Now we just need the rest of the world to follow suit.
- goodJobWalrus 11y ago
  Is that really a thing in the rest of the world? I thought it was mostly the US, and even there mostly the homeschooling thing.
  - dalke 11y ago
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_and_evolution_in_public_education#By_country http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_and_evolution_in_publi...
    - goodJobWalrus 11y ago
      From a cursory look at this, it appears that it indeed is not a thing in most of the world.
  - earlyriser 11y ago
    That's also my perspective. I grew up in Mexico, a very Catholic country and I went to a private Catholic school and we had religious classes and science classes. The content of both wasn't mixed, we had "brothers" giving the religious ones, and real scientists (Chemists, Biologists) giving the science ones. Even priests conceded that the Genesis story was a metaphor.
    - crusso 11y ago
      The Catholic church's leadership has taught that there's no conflict between Evolution and Christianity for at least the past 60 years.
    - gyim 11y ago
      I had similar experiences in Hungary: I grew up in a very religious community (mostly Catholic) and went to a Catholic high school. Many of our teachers (including biology, geology and physics) were Catholic priests, yet I never heard anybody arguing against evolution. I was 17 years old when I first met a young-earth creationist: he was an American missionary... I am still Christian and I know lots of people in various religious groups, but 14 years later I have only met one person who believes in Intelligent Design, and I know about 2 other people from mailing lists / blogs who are creationists. The sad part is, young-earth creationists are such a vocal group that whenever somebody learns that I am a Christian, I am usually asked how I can believe in such nonsense as a 6000-year old Earth :)
  - ZeroGravitas 11y ago
    To be clear, despite the current story, it's not really a thing in Scotland or the UK either. I think this was prompted by some American faith groups getting involved in some schools in Scotland. The reason they weren't previously banned is because no-one thought it would come up.
    - geomark 11y ago
      This is interesting. I would have thought this was one of the factors dragging down math and science test scores in many western countries. The latest OECD rankings of 15 year olds in math and science put the UK at 20th and US at 28th. Seems pretty poor considering a country like Vietnam which was ravaged by war only a generation ago ranks 12th. FYI Top 10 [1]: 1.Singapore 2.Hong Kong 3.South Korea 4.Japan (joint) 5.Taiwan (joint) 6.Finland 7.Estonia 8.Switzerland 9.Netherlands 10.Canada [1]http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/singapore-tops-oecd-s/1843546.html http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/singapore-tops...
      - pjc50 11y ago
        I think the Western poor performance is a result of (a) terrible disorganisation in the education bureaucracy and (b) a lack of belief by people at the low end in the value of education for social mobility. It's very easy for someone who didn't get educational opportunities to believe that making their kids do well will go better for them. In the West, there are a noticeable minority of people who did OK in the standard education, did badly in the search for work, and now have kids.
        btilly 11y ago
        There are claims that sampling errors for the best known one hurt the US. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programme_for_International_Student_Assessment#Sampling_errors http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programme_for_International_Stu... for more.) I have heard anecdotes that suggest some Asian countries (notably Singapore) pick unrealistically good students for their sample to make themselves look good. And also there is a question about mismatch between the test and the curriculum - certainly the US does better on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trends_in_International_Mathematics_and_Science_Study http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trends_in_International_Mathema... than on PISA. None of this is to say that the US actually has a good education system. But it is not necessarily as bad as people think.
  - dragonwriter 11y ago
    Not so much homeschooling specifically as Christian, mostly Protestant, political conservatives (often theologically fundamentalist, but not exclusively). Sometimes they also homesick as a reaction to content in public schools, but in many places in the US they've been fairly successful in dominating school authorities at the local and even state level and directing the curriculum. But American religious/political activist groups often work to expiry their views overseas as well and implement similar policies -- there's been some attention to that on anti-gay policies, but pro-creationism features some of the same tactics.
    - Jtsummers 11y ago
      In the SE US it's also common to find a lot of (non-Catholic [0]) Christian schools where this is prominent as well. I haven't, in recent years, spent enough time in any other US regions to know if they're similarly common elsewhere. It seems like a new one pops up every year or two in this county. [0] I make this distinction because, IME, Catholic schools are generally better about separating science and religion courses. There are still more fundamentalist Catholics, but the Church (and thus most of the schools) has pulled away from that over the years.
  - seivan 11y ago
    Essentially many islamic countries that apply Sharia teaches creationism.
  - bediger4000 11y ago
    Creationism is a huge thing in the USA. At the state and local levels, where elementary and high school curriculum is mostly decided, there are fights over it all the time. Evolution is enough of a hot-button-issue that it's mostly glossed over in public schools, to the detriment of biology classes. People set up charter schools all the time in order to teach creationism outright.
m-i-l 11y ago
There was a case last year in England where a religious school removed questions on evolution from exam papers: "The examinations body, OCR, says it was satisfied that the girls did not have an unfair advantage. It now plans to allow the practice" [0]. [0] "Jewish school redacts exam to remove evolution questions" http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-26437882 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-26437882
Oletros 11y ago
As it should be, in Science class it is only allowed scientific material It would be a good thing to argument why creationism is an scientific material and should be allowed in an Science class after voting
kbart 11y ago
I find it funny and sad that in 21st century we still have to explicitly prohibit such thing. Up next -- "Tooth faery theory banned from dental schools".
- Sharlin 11y ago
  It was not banned. It was never permitted in the first place, or more accurately, the issue was never even raised before this. A special interest group asked the government to ban it, the government answered that of course it's not allowed in science class as it's not science, there's nothong that has to be done, the group decided to interpret the matter-of-factly reply as "banning". There was no administrative action involved.
  - pjc50 11y ago
    I don't know why this got a downvote as it's an accurate summary of the article.
  - peteretep 11y ago
    15-16 years ago it was being taught as a "some people think this happened instead of evolution lol" for GCSE biology.
- wbillingsley 11y ago
  There's nothing in the article to suggest they actually did have to (quite the contrary -- the government had been replying for ages that there wasn't a need for a ban). Perhaps I'm cynical, but it seems to have gone like this... "Minister, when will the Government ban bandersnatches from school cupboards?" "Um, I'm pretty sure there aren't any bandersnatches in the school cupboards..." "Minister refuses to ban bandersnatches from school cupboards! Everyone, sign our petition to insist that school cupboards are no place for a bandersnatch, and join our team!" "I really don't think we have any..." "The government is still refusing to institute a proper ban on keeping them in school cupboards, and putting our children's education at risk! Like us on Facebook! Tweet our campaign link! With your help we can make them move on this!" "But we really... oh, forget it, fine, we hereby ban bandersnatches from school cupboards, will you go away now please?" "Hooray! Thanks to our campaign, the government has finally banned bandersnatches from school broom cupboards. This is why you should donate to us -- remember, we're the organisation that finally made the government ban bandersnatches from school cupboards, and you can make your donation to us at this address..."
ticksoft 11y ago
I'm divided on these sorts of things (I didn't used to be). Sure science classes shouldn't be teaching religion, but having governments decide what's an approved view for its population is bothersome. People should be allowed to make mistakes and when the parents realise that their kids are at a disadvantage then the parents should learn to gather together and fix it themselves. Encourage people to be active in their community rather than sitting back and expecting someone from the top to take the initiative.
- brational 11y ago
  What happens to the kids whose parents won't provide any leadership or input?
- arethuza 11y ago
  Kids do get taught about religion in Scottish schools in Religious, Moral and Philosophical Studies - where they can learn about lots of different religions and their different beliefs. My son has just done this course at National 5 and found it very interesting and he's not in the slightest bit religious: http://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/47421.html http://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/47421.html [Edit: I got Standard Grades and National 5s mixed up!]
- kbart 11y ago
  This move, more likely, is aimed to protect children against idiot parents. Much like vaccination is being enforced. People do have right to be ignorant and believe whatever bullshit they want, but forcing stupid/harmful believes on children should not be allowed as it may damage them for the rest of their lives. If I were in charge, I would ban all religion related matters on children under 18.
- TheOtherHobbes 11y ago
  >having governments decide what's an approved view for its population I don't think it's about governments deciding on an approved view, so much as government removing the teaching of obvious nonsense from schools. Religious schools - which still exist, unfortunately - have no problem with forcing their approved views on kids, even after those views have proven to be harmful: as in - say - abstinence education instead of useful sex ed.
s_dev 11y ago
Most of the UK and Ireland are arguably secular (but not technically) with most people holding reasonable scientifically literate beliefs. Northern Ireland however is the last bastion of open religious bigotry and nonsense in the UK. Classic example. Republic of Ireland passed a Gay Marriage referendum last week while at the same time in NI a confectionary baker "Ashers" in Northern Ireland refused to serve a gay man who requested a cake that had support for gay marriage iced on the cake. The controversy showed that many in NI are at worst openly hostile or at best completely indifferent to gay people. This kind of attitude is carried in to classrooms in NI as well. I support this move by Scotland but Northern Ireland has some crazy creationists nonsense still happening and these kind of measures are need much more in NI than the rest of the UK.
- mattmanser 11y ago
  I didn't d/v you, but I think if you dig into a few more of your friends views you'd find a lot more religion than you realise.
  - s_dev 11y ago
    Actually no, not in the younger generation but absolutely in the older generations. Ireland is one of the most rapidly secularising/atheist countries in the world at the moment with the UK close behind.
    - mattmanser 11y ago
      Again, if you dig a bit more, you'd be surprised. Or you've surrounded yourself with a niche of people.
merpnderp 11y ago
Only two states in the US that explicitly bans creationism have above average NAEP scores. Nearly every state with above average NAEP scores allows some form of creationism in the science room. Sure kids should learn evolution, and creationism belongs in the religion class, but there are many other things to fix in education before this.
gizi 11y ago
Creationism has obviously no foundation in science but neither has evolutionism. Where are the repeatable experiments required in order to be able to look for counterexamples for evolutionism? Has anybody ever "evolved" a species from another? If yes, how can we repeat that experiment? It is clear that evolutionism has no scientific status either.
- jobigoud 11y ago
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_evolution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_evolution
  - gizi 11y ago
    They may indeed try to evolve a species out of another. In all examples in your link, they stay within the same species, however. There is simply no convincing experiment in which they evolve one species out of another. It does not exist.
    - mikeash 11y ago
      "Species" is an artificial distinction that human biologists use to make it easier to talk about what's going on. There is no objective distinction between species. The idea that the universe somehow permits evolution within a species but does not permit evolution from one species to another is nonsensical, on roughly the same level as thinking that it's possible to walk one mile but not possible to walk ten miles.
      - gizi 11y ago
        Indeed, the first problem starts already with just the title of that notorious book: On the origin of species. What exactly is a species? If we cannot etch a reasonable definition for that term in stone, then all statements that make use of that term are questionable, on that basis alone. Evolutionism then becomes a theory about things that we cannot define that evolve into other things that we cannot define ... How could that ever be science?
kendallpark 11y ago
It's fine to teach creationism... just not in a science class. What the majority of the creation supporters don't get is that creationism isn't a science, it's a philosophy. There's nothing constructive or tangible about the theory. You can't test it in a lab, you can't observe it in nature--unless you think irreducible complexity (aka "we don't understand how this could come about, therefore it must be divinely created") is a sound scientific theory. (BTW most of Behe's original examples of "irreducibly complex" biological phenomena have since been reduced.) I went to a very Christian liberal arts college and creationism was only taught in particular classes like Theories of Origins or theology courses. Biology classes only taught evolution. There might be one day that included a broader survey of creation theories, but that was it. That being said, both the biology and theology departments were majority evolutionist. Go figure.
- mikeash 11y ago
  In my experience (of which I unfortunately have far too much), creationists fundamentally don't understand what science is, which is why they think their ideas qualify. They simply don't grasp the depth or the quantitative nature that underlies statements like "the universe is 13 billion years old" or "humans evolved from single-celled organisms." It's basically cargo-culting popular science articles. They see something like "continental drift is demonstrated by how the coastlines of Africa and the Americas fit so neatly together." They then come up with something that sounds similar, like, "the Grand Canyon could have been carved by a huge and sudden deluge, demonstrating Noah's Flood." The fact that the Africa/Americas thing is just a brief summary of mountains (sometimes literally so) of data is completely lost.
  - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
    Its worse than that. They're deliberately hijacking the catchphrases of science to appear legitimate, so they can insert their religious message into classrooms. Its as cynical as can be. No need to impute goodwill or mistaken good intentions; they have an agenda.
    - mikeash 11y ago
morpheous 11y ago
Makes one proud to be a Brit - or more specifically, a Scott!
dataker 11y ago
Although I'm an atheist, I find this to be somewhat disturbing. Creationism, regardless of its mythological background, still is part of Humanity and any conclusions about it should be drawn by the individual, not the State or teachers. They'd be better off spending more time with Critical Thinking, Scientific Method and Logic, powerful tools to genuinely understand Religion and not just take "facts" for granted.
- arethuza 11y ago
  As I've noted in another comment below. Kids in Scotland can study Religious, Moral and Philosophical Studies if they want - which is, I believe, a far more appropriate context for religious beliefs than a science class.
- CyberDildonics 11y ago
  It was banned from science classes, they didn't ban theology.
- mikeash 11y ago
  Would you say this about other subjects, or just the origins of life and the universe? Would you say that schools should not exclusively teach that 2+2=4, but give the students tools and allow them to draw their own conclusions? Should schools allow students to reach their own conclusions as to whether the Earth is flat, or whether the Sun is pulled across the sky by chariots? Schools should absolutely teach creationism, in the same classes where they teach Greek mythology, Hindu gods, Native American creation stories, etc. And that is exactly what happens here. To quote the article, "...creationism can be taught in religious and moral education...."
  - dataker 11y ago
    Going back to the Greeks(e.g Essentialism) all the way to Modern Evolution would foster a much stronger intellectual background and avoid most future indoctrination. Understanding fallacies in theories is better than just taking them for granted. But why be so picky on this matter? Unlike other concepts, Religion/Indoctrination can have a serious impact on one's life and true critical thinking is the only weapon against it.
JoeAltmaier 11y ago
The real irony is, the Creationist are so sure science can't be the right explanation. Why? The clear implication is, God was not smart enough to create a Universe that would evolve us. No, he had to cheat and Bang! here we are. Their God is as dumb as they are.
fractallyte 11y ago
I'm currently teaching computing at a independent fundamentalist Christian 'young Earth' creationist school - in London, UK. It's surreal at times. The kids (~20 altogether!) are wonderful: well mannered, eager to learn. So my frustration is extreme when I see the material they're being force-fed. The school follows the ACE ('Accelerated Christian Education') curriculum. It's imported from the USA, and teaches that the Earth is 6000 years old, that there was a Great Flood, and that evolution is evil. The textbooks are seething with pseudoscience - from illustrations of humans coexisting with dinosaurs, to articles connecting snakes to the serpent from the Garden of Eden, and so much more... The real problem is that Ofsted - the UK government's regulator for standards in education - has consistently given the school a 'good' rating. (WTF???) Worse yet, the accreditation offered by the school - the ICCE (International Certificate of Christian Education) - is actually considered by UK NARIC (the 'designated National Agency responsible for providing information, advice and expert opinion on qualifications worldwide') to be "comparable to the overall Cambridge International O and A Level standard respectively." (Again, WTF???) Since the government has utterly failed these student victims, I figured that perhaps an appeal to rationality might get somewhere. So, a few weeks back I had a 9 hour(!) meeting with the school principal and her husband. It failed, and perhaps I came close to being asked to leave. But I'm diplomatic (and valuable), so I'm still there. Since then I've devoted many hours to Bible study, and research into the arguments of Creationists. (Remember: one can't engage with these people using reason or rationality. Know your opponent.) I strongly feel it's possible to convey to them the vitality of Science - that it's one of the holiest of human endeavors, to be blessed rather than reviled. And it's backed by solid religious arguments, supported completely by Scripture, and by Christian luminaries from Augustine of Hippo to John Calvin. I'm preparing a presentation to the school management (and, hopefully, parents)...
- fractallyte 11y ago
  Incidentally, the article is wrong on one important point: "The teaching of creationism as a scientific fact and evidence-based theory is prohibited in schools in England and Wales." This only applies to government-funded schools. Independent schools can get away with anything.
jcmoscon 11y ago
We all lucky that nothing exploded and created everything 1000000000000000 years ago in a galaxy far far away, right?

110 points by mirceasoaica 11y ago

noir-york 11y ago

Now we just need the rest of the world to follow suit.

goodJobWalrus 11y ago
Is that really a thing in the rest of the world? I thought it was mostly the US, and even there mostly the homeschooling thing.
- dalke 11y ago
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_and_evolution_in_public_education#By_country http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation_and_evolution_in_publi...
  - goodJobWalrus 11y ago
    From a cursory look at this, it appears that it indeed is not a thing in most of the world.
- earlyriser 11y ago
  That's also my perspective. I grew up in Mexico, a very Catholic country and I went to a private Catholic school and we had religious classes and science classes. The content of both wasn't mixed, we had "brothers" giving the religious ones, and real scientists (Chemists, Biologists) giving the science ones. Even priests conceded that the Genesis story was a metaphor.
  - crusso 11y ago
    The Catholic church's leadership has taught that there's no conflict between Evolution and Christianity for at least the past 60 years.
  - gyim 11y ago
    I had similar experiences in Hungary: I grew up in a very religious community (mostly Catholic) and went to a Catholic high school. Many of our teachers (including biology, geology and physics) were Catholic priests, yet I never heard anybody arguing against evolution. I was 17 years old when I first met a young-earth creationist: he was an American missionary... I am still Christian and I know lots of people in various religious groups, but 14 years later I have only met one person who believes in Intelligent Design, and I know about 2 other people from mailing lists / blogs who are creationists. The sad part is, young-earth creationists are such a vocal group that whenever somebody learns that I am a Christian, I am usually asked how I can believe in such nonsense as a 6000-year old Earth :)
- ZeroGravitas 11y ago
  To be clear, despite the current story, it's not really a thing in Scotland or the UK either. I think this was prompted by some American faith groups getting involved in some schools in Scotland. The reason they weren't previously banned is because no-one thought it would come up.
  - geomark 11y ago
    This is interesting. I would have thought this was one of the factors dragging down math and science test scores in many western countries. The latest OECD rankings of 15 year olds in math and science put the UK at 20th and US at 28th. Seems pretty poor considering a country like Vietnam which was ravaged by war only a generation ago ranks 12th. FYI Top 10 [1]: 1.Singapore 2.Hong Kong 3.South Korea 4.Japan (joint) 5.Taiwan (joint) 6.Finland 7.Estonia 8.Switzerland 9.Netherlands 10.Canada [1]http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/singapore-tops-oecd-s/1843546.html http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/singapore-tops...
    - pjc50 11y ago
      I think the Western poor performance is a result of (a) terrible disorganisation in the education bureaucracy and (b) a lack of belief by people at the low end in the value of education for social mobility. It's very easy for someone who didn't get educational opportunities to believe that making their kids do well will go better for them. In the West, there are a noticeable minority of people who did OK in the standard education, did badly in the search for work, and now have kids.
      - btilly 11y ago
        There are claims that sampling errors for the best known one hurt the US. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programme_for_International_Student_Assessment#Sampling_errors http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programme_for_International_Stu... for more.) I have heard anecdotes that suggest some Asian countries (notably Singapore) pick unrealistically good students for their sample to make themselves look good. And also there is a question about mismatch between the test and the curriculum - certainly the US does better on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trends_in_International_Mathematics_and_Science_Study http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trends_in_International_Mathema... than on PISA. None of this is to say that the US actually has a good education system. But it is not necessarily as bad as people think.
- dragonwriter 11y ago
  Not so much homeschooling specifically as Christian, mostly Protestant, political conservatives (often theologically fundamentalist, but not exclusively). Sometimes they also homesick as a reaction to content in public schools, but in many places in the US they've been fairly successful in dominating school authorities at the local and even state level and directing the curriculum. But American religious/political activist groups often work to expiry their views overseas as well and implement similar policies -- there's been some attention to that on anti-gay policies, but pro-creationism features some of the same tactics.
  - Jtsummers 11y ago
    In the SE US it's also common to find a lot of (non-Catholic [0]) Christian schools where this is prominent as well. I haven't, in recent years, spent enough time in any other US regions to know if they're similarly common elsewhere. It seems like a new one pops up every year or two in this county. [0] I make this distinction because, IME, Catholic schools are generally better about separating science and religion courses. There are still more fundamentalist Catholics, but the Church (and thus most of the schools) has pulled away from that over the years.
- seivan 11y ago
  Essentially many islamic countries that apply Sharia teaches creationism.
- bediger4000 11y ago
  Creationism is a huge thing in the USA. At the state and local levels, where elementary and high school curriculum is mostly decided, there are fights over it all the time. Evolution is enough of a hot-button-issue that it's mostly glossed over in public schools, to the detriment of biology classes. People set up charter schools all the time in order to teach creationism outright.

m-i-l 11y ago

There was a case last year in England where a religious school removed questions on evolution from exam papers: "The examinations body, OCR, says it was satisfied that the girls did not have an unfair advantage. It now plans to allow the practice" [0]. [0] "Jewish school redacts exam to remove evolution questions" http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-26437882 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-26437882

Oletros 11y ago

As it should be, in Science class it is only allowed scientific material It would be a good thing to argument why creationism is an scientific material and should be allowed in an Science class after voting

kbart 11y ago

I find it funny and sad that in 21st century we still have to explicitly prohibit such thing. Up next -- "Tooth faery theory banned from dental schools".

Sharlin 11y ago
It was not banned. It was never permitted in the first place, or more accurately, the issue was never even raised before this. A special interest group asked the government to ban it, the government answered that of course it's not allowed in science class as it's not science, there's nothong that has to be done, the group decided to interpret the matter-of-factly reply as "banning". There was no administrative action involved.
- pjc50 11y ago
  I don't know why this got a downvote as it's an accurate summary of the article.
- peteretep 11y ago
  15-16 years ago it was being taught as a "some people think this happened instead of evolution lol" for GCSE biology.
wbillingsley 11y ago
There's nothing in the article to suggest they actually did have to (quite the contrary -- the government had been replying for ages that there wasn't a need for a ban). Perhaps I'm cynical, but it seems to have gone like this... "Minister, when will the Government ban bandersnatches from school cupboards?" "Um, I'm pretty sure there aren't any bandersnatches in the school cupboards..." "Minister refuses to ban bandersnatches from school cupboards! Everyone, sign our petition to insist that school cupboards are no place for a bandersnatch, and join our team!" "I really don't think we have any..." "The government is still refusing to institute a proper ban on keeping them in school cupboards, and putting our children's education at risk! Like us on Facebook! Tweet our campaign link! With your help we can make them move on this!" "But we really... oh, forget it, fine, we hereby ban bandersnatches from school cupboards, will you go away now please?" "Hooray! Thanks to our campaign, the government has finally banned bandersnatches from school broom cupboards. This is why you should donate to us -- remember, we're the organisation that finally made the government ban bandersnatches from school cupboards, and you can make your donation to us at this address..."

ticksoft 11y ago

I'm divided on these sorts of things (I didn't used to be). Sure science classes shouldn't be teaching religion, but having governments decide what's an approved view for its population is bothersome. People should be allowed to make mistakes and when the parents realise that their kids are at a disadvantage then the parents should learn to gather together and fix it themselves. Encourage people to be active in their community rather than sitting back and expecting someone from the top to take the initiative.

brational 11y ago
What happens to the kids whose parents won't provide any leadership or input?
arethuza 11y ago
Kids do get taught about religion in Scottish schools in Religious, Moral and Philosophical Studies - where they can learn about lots of different religions and their different beliefs. My son has just done this course at National 5 and found it very interesting and he's not in the slightest bit religious: http://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/47421.html http://www.sqa.org.uk/sqa/47421.html [Edit: I got Standard Grades and National 5s mixed up!]
kbart 11y ago
This move, more likely, is aimed to protect children against idiot parents. Much like vaccination is being enforced. People do have right to be ignorant and believe whatever bullshit they want, but forcing stupid/harmful believes on children should not be allowed as it may damage them for the rest of their lives. If I were in charge, I would ban all religion related matters on children under 18.
TheOtherHobbes 11y ago
>having governments decide what's an approved view for its population I don't think it's about governments deciding on an approved view, so much as government removing the teaching of obvious nonsense from schools. Religious schools - which still exist, unfortunately - have no problem with forcing their approved views on kids, even after those views have proven to be harmful: as in - say - abstinence education instead of useful sex ed.

s_dev 11y ago

Most of the UK and Ireland are arguably secular (but not technically) with most people holding reasonable scientifically literate beliefs. Northern Ireland however is the last bastion of open religious bigotry and nonsense in the UK. Classic example. Republic of Ireland passed a Gay Marriage referendum last week while at the same time in NI a confectionary baker "Ashers" in Northern Ireland refused to serve a gay man who requested a cake that had support for gay marriage iced on the cake. The controversy showed that many in NI are at worst openly hostile or at best completely indifferent to gay people. This kind of attitude is carried in to classrooms in NI as well. I support this move by Scotland but Northern Ireland has some crazy creationists nonsense still happening and these kind of measures are need much more in NI than the rest of the UK.

mattmanser 11y ago
I didn't d/v you, but I think if you dig into a few more of your friends views you'd find a lot more religion than you realise.
- s_dev 11y ago
  Actually no, not in the younger generation but absolutely in the older generations. Ireland is one of the most rapidly secularising/atheist countries in the world at the moment with the UK close behind.
  - mattmanser 11y ago
    Again, if you dig a bit more, you'd be surprised. Or you've surrounded yourself with a niche of people.

merpnderp 11y ago

Only two states in the US that explicitly bans creationism have above average NAEP scores. Nearly every state with above average NAEP scores allows some form of creationism in the science room. Sure kids should learn evolution, and creationism belongs in the religion class, but there are many other things to fix in education before this.

gizi 11y ago

Creationism has obviously no foundation in science but neither has evolutionism. Where are the repeatable experiments required in order to be able to look for counterexamples for evolutionism? Has anybody ever "evolved" a species from another? If yes, how can we repeat that experiment? It is clear that evolutionism has no scientific status either.

jobigoud 11y ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_evolution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_evolution
- gizi 11y ago
  They may indeed try to evolve a species out of another. In all examples in your link, they stay within the same species, however. There is simply no convincing experiment in which they evolve one species out of another. It does not exist.
  - mikeash 11y ago
    "Species" is an artificial distinction that human biologists use to make it easier to talk about what's going on. There is no objective distinction between species. The idea that the universe somehow permits evolution within a species but does not permit evolution from one species to another is nonsensical, on roughly the same level as thinking that it's possible to walk one mile but not possible to walk ten miles.
    - gizi 11y ago
      Indeed, the first problem starts already with just the title of that notorious book: On the origin of species. What exactly is a species? If we cannot etch a reasonable definition for that term in stone, then all statements that make use of that term are questionable, on that basis alone. Evolutionism then becomes a theory about things that we cannot define that evolve into other things that we cannot define ... How could that ever be science?

kendallpark 11y ago

It's fine to teach creationism... just not in a science class. What the majority of the creation supporters don't get is that creationism isn't a science, it's a philosophy. There's nothing constructive or tangible about the theory. You can't test it in a lab, you can't observe it in nature--unless you think irreducible complexity (aka "we don't understand how this could come about, therefore it must be divinely created") is a sound scientific theory. (BTW most of Behe's original examples of "irreducibly complex" biological phenomena have since been reduced.) I went to a very Christian liberal arts college and creationism was only taught in particular classes like Theories of Origins or theology courses. Biology classes only taught evolution. There might be one day that included a broader survey of creation theories, but that was it. That being said, both the biology and theology departments were majority evolutionist. Go figure.

mikeash 11y ago
In my experience (of which I unfortunately have far too much), creationists fundamentally don't understand what science is, which is why they think their ideas qualify. They simply don't grasp the depth or the quantitative nature that underlies statements like "the universe is 13 billion years old" or "humans evolved from single-celled organisms." It's basically cargo-culting popular science articles. They see something like "continental drift is demonstrated by how the coastlines of Africa and the Americas fit so neatly together." They then come up with something that sounds similar, like, "the Grand Canyon could have been carved by a huge and sudden deluge, demonstrating Noah's Flood." The fact that the Africa/Americas thing is just a brief summary of mountains (sometimes literally so) of data is completely lost.
- JoeAltmaier 11y ago
  Its worse than that. They're deliberately hijacking the catchphrases of science to appear legitimate, so they can insert their religious message into classrooms. Its as cynical as can be. No need to impute goodwill or mistaken good intentions; they have an agenda.
  - mikeash 11y ago

morpheous 11y ago

Makes one proud to be a Brit - or more specifically, a Scott!

dataker 11y ago

Although I'm an atheist, I find this to be somewhat disturbing. Creationism, regardless of its mythological background, still is part of Humanity and any conclusions about it should be drawn by the individual, not the State or teachers. They'd be better off spending more time with Critical Thinking, Scientific Method and Logic, powerful tools to genuinely understand Religion and not just take "facts" for granted.

arethuza 11y ago
As I've noted in another comment below. Kids in Scotland can study Religious, Moral and Philosophical Studies if they want - which is, I believe, a far more appropriate context for religious beliefs than a science class.
CyberDildonics 11y ago
It was banned from science classes, they didn't ban theology.
mikeash 11y ago
Would you say this about other subjects, or just the origins of life and the universe? Would you say that schools should not exclusively teach that 2+2=4, but give the students tools and allow them to draw their own conclusions? Should schools allow students to reach their own conclusions as to whether the Earth is flat, or whether the Sun is pulled across the sky by chariots? Schools should absolutely teach creationism, in the same classes where they teach Greek mythology, Hindu gods, Native American creation stories, etc. And that is exactly what happens here. To quote the article, "...creationism can be taught in religious and moral education...."
- dataker 11y ago
  Going back to the Greeks(e.g Essentialism) all the way to Modern Evolution would foster a much stronger intellectual background and avoid most future indoctrination. Understanding fallacies in theories is better than just taking them for granted. But why be so picky on this matter? Unlike other concepts, Religion/Indoctrination can have a serious impact on one's life and true critical thinking is the only weapon against it.

JoeAltmaier 11y ago

The real irony is, the Creationist are so sure science can't be the right explanation. Why? The clear implication is, God was not smart enough to create a Universe that would evolve us. No, he had to cheat and Bang! here we are. Their God is as dumb as they are.

fractallyte 11y ago

I'm currently teaching computing at a independent fundamentalist Christian 'young Earth' creationist school - in London, UK. It's surreal at times. The kids (~20 altogether!) are wonderful: well mannered, eager to learn. So my frustration is extreme when I see the material they're being force-fed. The school follows the ACE ('Accelerated Christian Education') curriculum. It's imported from the USA, and teaches that the Earth is 6000 years old, that there was a Great Flood, and that evolution is evil. The textbooks are seething with pseudoscience - from illustrations of humans coexisting with dinosaurs, to articles connecting snakes to the serpent from the Garden of Eden, and so much more... The real problem is that Ofsted - the UK government's regulator for standards in education - has consistently given the school a 'good' rating. (WTF???) Worse yet, the accreditation offered by the school - the ICCE (International Certificate of Christian Education) - is actually considered by UK NARIC (the 'designated National Agency responsible for providing information, advice and expert opinion on qualifications worldwide') to be "comparable to the overall Cambridge International O and A Level standard respectively." (Again, WTF???) Since the government has utterly failed these student victims, I figured that perhaps an appeal to rationality might get somewhere. So, a few weeks back I had a 9 hour(!) meeting with the school principal and her husband. It failed, and perhaps I came close to being asked to leave. But I'm diplomatic (and valuable), so I'm still there. Since then I've devoted many hours to Bible study, and research into the arguments of Creationists. (Remember: one can't engage with these people using reason or rationality. Know your opponent.) I strongly feel it's possible to convey to them the vitality of Science - that it's one of the holiest of human endeavors, to be blessed rather than reviled. And it's backed by solid religious arguments, supported completely by Scripture, and by Christian luminaries from Augustine of Hippo to John Calvin. I'm preparing a presentation to the school management (and, hopefully, parents)...

fractallyte 11y ago
Incidentally, the article is wrong on one important point: "The teaching of creationism as a scientific fact and evidence-based theory is prohibited in schools in England and Wales." This only applies to government-funded schools. Independent schools can get away with anything.

jcmoscon 11y ago

We all lucky that nothing exploded and created everything 1000000000000000 years ago in a galaxy far far away, right?