Priest in the Classroom
by MikeGeneWe've previously seen that E.O. Wilson thinks biology is the battleground for his faith. He continues this theme over at the Edge . Here is his vision of an introductory science class:
Ask the questions right from the beginning of the freshman class: What is the meaning of sex? Why do we have to die? Why do people grow old? What's the whole point of all this? You've got their attention. You talk about the scientific exploration of these issues and in order to understand them you have to understand something about the whole process of evolution and how the body works.
You say that we're going to deal with two great principles that are the substance of biology and which you must know: One, that everything that's in the body, including the brain and the action of the mind, is obedient to the laws of physics and chemistry as we understand it. And two, that the body, the species, and life as a whole evolved by natural selection. You take it from there and explain as best we can what we know about science, recognizing that there are still unanswered questions. If you sensibly ask what the meaning of life is, you don't have to worry about science haters or mathophobes. You've got 'em.
Meaning of life in Bio101? Sounds like someone wants to use science as a Trojan Horse to peddle their metaphysics to 18 year olds. Sign-up to learn about genetic engineering or because your university requires you to have a certain amount of natural science credits and receive a sermon about the meaning of life.
Wilson also has some observations about scientists:
Most science education takes a boot camp approach or is set up to train acolytes. That's because most scientists are journeymen"”they're not masters. That is to say, they're well-versed and if it's a major research university they probably have some accomplishments on a narrow segment of scientific research, but basically they think like journeymen and are there to train journeymen. They don't think particularly laterally about what their field means.
December 28th, 2005 at 3:57 pm
I think Wilson needs to wake up and smell the coffee.
Comment by Benjii — December 28, 2005 @ 3:57 pm
December 29th, 2005 at 3:28 pm
Why is it okay for ID advocates to discuss their religious motivations, and not okay for a distinguished scientist like Wilson to discuss his desire fore better ethics?
More bias against science, it looks like to me.
Comment by edarrell — December 29, 2005 @ 3:28 pm
December 29th, 2005 at 5:47 pm
Hi Edarrell,
"Why is it okay for ID advocates to discuss their religious motivations, and not okay for a distinguished scientist like Wilson to discuss his desire fore better ethics?"
Do you know of any public school teachers who use biology classes to talk about their religious motivations? If so, you should forward that information to the ACLU.
Comment by Krauze — December 29, 2005 @ 5:47 pm
December 29th, 2005 at 6:05 pm
Edarrell,
As you know, since you were so fond of Wesley's Wedge, I informed you that I would apply that wedge to you.
We all know that Ed does not think it is okay for ID advocates to discuss their religious motivations in a science class. Thus, Ed has lied.
Notice that Ed has changed "What's the whole point of all this?" and "the meaning of life" into "better ethics." A second lie.
No bias against science. A third lie.
Two sentences and three lies from the guy who sits on his high horse and preaches against lying. Tha gives you a total of six lies over the last few days. Because of his unethical behavior and the stench of hypocrisy, Ed is banned from further participation in this thread.
Comment by MikeGene — December 29, 2005 @ 6:05 pm