Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!cbatt!ihnp4!ptsfa!lll-lcc!mordor!sri-spam!sri-unix!salem From: salem@sri-unix.UUCP Newsgroups: sci.misc Subject: Re: James Burke Message-ID: <1416@sri-unix.ARPA> Date: Mon, 2-Mar-87 14:50:11 EST Article-I.D.: sri-unix.1416 Posted: Mon Mar 2 14:50:11 1987 Date-Received: Tue, 3-Mar-87 23:07:09 EST References: <2818@udenva.UUCP> <7008@ut-sally.UUCP> <937@mips.UUCP> <7038@ut-sally.UUCP> <646@cdx39.UUCP> <12533@watnot.UUCP> Reply-To: salem@sri-unix.UUCP (Bruce B. Salem) Distribution: na Organization: SRI, Menlo Park, CA. Lines: 49 In article <12533@watnot.UUCP> ccplumb@watnot.UUCP (Colin Plumb) writes: >In article <646@cdx39.UUCP> jc@cdx39.UUCP (John Chambers) writes: >> Oh, yes, another loss: Back in the 40's and early 50's, we had high-school >> biology texts that did a reasonably good job of introducing the concept of >> evolution; religious pressure caused the publishers to eliminate this part >> of the texts. Now we have a population that thinks that it is reasonable >> to debate whether "scientific creationism" should be taught in schools. >> The very fact that they can get away with using such a phrase and not be >> laughed out of the room is evidence of how much we have lost on this front. > > Agreed wholeheartedly. I've never felt the effects of such debates, >but it's scary to think they're taking place at all. > > -Colin Plumb (ccplumb@watnot.UUCP) There are several ways to look at this. Some possible interpetations: 1) The schools, especially public schools, have been co-opted into thinking they have to please everybody, every minority that has a voice in their community and state, and not offend anyone. This view holds that you water everything down that is controversial because it can't be handled in the classroom, or it must be handled legally, administratively, at the state level. Maybe this is a symptom of a fundemetal trend in problem solving in this nation. 2) The science curricula have been suffering from a peak of support in 1963 because national priorities have shifted away from support for basic science. Science is being more poorly taught now than it was before. People don't understand what science claims anymore. They con't distinguish it from non-science, cult or religion. 3) The country has gone Conservative. It is older demographically, and the conservatives, who have always been there, are getting their views aired because of the political mood of the nation and the administration in Washington. 4) The opposite view may be the case, the 'fundies are getting smoked out of the pulpet, the Creationists are getting their view aired in a real examination of the issues. What do you think? Is it all of these? Are there any more? What could we do about it as technocrates and, some of us, with advanced degrees in science? -- Bruce B. Salem UUCP: hplabs!ames!spam!sri-unix!salem ARPA: salem@unix.sri.com SRI International PHONE: (415) 859-5334 PN309 333 Ravenswood St. Menlo Park Ca. 94025