Is There a Political Argument for Teaching Evolution?

Taner EdisDepartment of Physics Truman State University

Trondheim 2

US Creationism, Feb 2012

• Indiana, Senate Bill 89: “The governing body of a school corporation may require the teaching of various theories concerning the origin of life, including creation science, within the school corporation.”

• Alabama, Oklahoma, New Hampshire, …

• All failed, or will fail. But they will be back.

2012

Trondheim 3

Popular, but limited

• Large public support. (Gallup since 1980: 45% YEC, 45% guided evolution, 10% naturalistic evolution.)

• Creationism and ID unacceptable in intellectual high culture.

• Little penetration into public education (informal, private).

2012

Trondheim 4

Islamic Creationism

• “Harun Yahya” materials: Turkish origin, but internationally popular.

• Denies common descent.

• In part, borrows from Christian creationists.

2012

Trondheim 5

Successful anti-evolution

• Present in public education.• Some acceptance in

intellectual high culture.• Even stronger popular,

religious opposition.

2012

Trondheim 6

Deplorable situation?

• Scientists + left/liberal opposition to creationism.

• Should give students best knowledge, determined by proper experts.

• Public interest: prepare students for modern, national citizenship.

2012

Trondheim 7

Conservative resistance

• Favor local, organic, religious communities; markets.

• “Expertise” = bureaucracy, elite impositions.

• Public education should be shaped by democratic, populist concerns.

2012

Trondheim 8

Politics of evolution education

• US: liberal dominance in education. (Weakening.)

• Turkey: conservative populism triumphant.

• Iran, Pakistan: common descent in textbooks, protected by notions of divine guidance, limitations.

2012

Trondheim 9

Why teach evolution?

• Can’t rely on common secular liberal outlook. (Maybe in Europe?)

• Appeal to common material interests? Harm science harm economy?

• Religious conservatives often love technology.

2012

Trondheim 10

Need science literacy?

• For democratic decision-making and knowledge economy.

• Problems: Science education is too resource-intensive. We encourage deference to experts. Liberal bias…?

2012

Trondheim 11

Need STEM professionals?

• Problems: No need for broad-based science education?

• Basic science ≠ technology. Need applied science. (Islamic countries, US.)

• Culture of applied science more conservative, religious. Includes creationism.

2012

Trondheim 12

Biomedical handicap?

• Prospects for medical and biotechnological development.

• Problems: “Evolutionary medicine” undeveloped. Medical schools don’t see need for evolution. Many doctors creationists.

2012

Trondheim 13

Technology corporations?

• Will high-tech businesses avoid environments where science is not respected?

• Dubious: Silicon Valley notorious for New Age. Indian middle class and Indian astrology etc.

• Minor issue at best.2012

Trondheim 14

Costs of basic science

• Often costly to support without direct economic benefits. (Astronomy, evolutionary biology, …)

• Costly in education.• Imposes steep cultural

costs on conservative religious communities.

2012

Trondheim 15

Evolution is disruptive

• Globally, conservative religious rejection of Darwinian evolution indicates cultural disruptiveness.

• Social and political cost of interfering with religion is high.

2012

Trondheim 16

Liberal impasse

• Liberal appeals to national-scale expertise are unpersuasive outside of a secular liberal constituency.

• Difficulty with imposing secular liberal views by means of public education. Undemocratic? Coercive?

2012

Trondheim 17

Pseudoscience as protection

• Creationism or guided-evolution views allow affirmation of technology, modernity, and many traditional beliefs.

• Politically and socially, a low-cost, low-conflict solution?

2012

Trondheim 18

Compromising science

• Scientific institutions, when conflicting with religions, cannot always claim a privileged political position.

• Politically, compromising science education can be rational. US & Turkey show such circumstances.

2012