Creation-evolution Controversy Research Articles

Evolution Versus Creationism in Education

As part of the continuing series of the Reviewing Policy section, this article examines some of the recent literature on the creation-evolution controversy. These controversies are placed within a larger analysis of the growth of authoritarian populist movements in the United States. The article then focuses attention on debates both over a number of arguments surrounding the ways in which intelligent design had been justified and surrounding some of the dangers of possible arrogance that have been associated with the history of the popularization of evolutionary perspectives. The author then offers some strategic suggestions for going forward.

Creationism

AbstractCreationist opposition to modern evolutionary and geological sciences derives from the attempt of American Protestant fundamentalists to protect the inerrancy of the Bible from the challenges of any and all historical sciences. Creation science is not an independent investigation of the natural world, but rather biblical testimony. Intelligent design, the latest variant of creationism, is better understood as a legal strategy rather than as genuine science. The creation–evolution controversy is at bottom a conflict over the status and authority of the Bible in the modern world. The Creationism with which this article is concerned is the antihistorical ideology associated with American Protestant fundamentalism. This article is divided into four sections: creationism in early fundamentalism, young‐earth creationism, creation science, and intelligent design.

Evolution and Creationism: One Long Argument

Ever since Darwin published On the Origin of Species in 1859, have argued against the theory of evolution. Creationists do not want God's hand to be removed from the of species and they see Darwin's dangerous idea (Dennett, 1995) doing just that. In The Creationists, Numbers (1993) provides an excellent history of the creationist movement, with emphasis on the so-called scientific creationists in the United States. A more recent book by Alters and Alters (2001) also examines the creation-evolution controversy, with more emphasis on ideas for biology teachers. Many other books, including those by Dawkins (1987,1996), Eldridge (2000), Futuyma (1995), Gould (1989, 1999), Kitcher (1982), National Academy of Sciences (1998), Moore (2000), Numbers (1992), Pennock (1999), and Ruse (1982, 1989) document the creation-evolution controversy. The links between racism and the anti-evolution campaign have been documented recently by Moore (2001). Related to the evolution-creationism struggle in Louisiana, the Edwards v. Aguillard (1987) decision of the U.S. Supreme Court held unconstitutional the Creationism Act of the Louisiana legislature. This law prohibited the teaching of evolution in public schools except when it was accompanied by instruction in creation science. The law would have required the development of creationist teaching materials, curriculum committees, and related educational support. A decade after this decision, Don Aguillard, the biology teacher named in the Edwards v. Aguillard case, researched the factors influencing the teaching of biological evolution in Louisiana public schools, as part of his doctoral degree requirements at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge. As his major professor I encouraged Don to follow his earlier activities as a science teacher and central figure in the legal case, with a careful analysis of the state of evolution education in Louisiana. Among his findings are the following (Aguillard, 1998):

Open Communication Essential to Progress in Creation-Evolution Controversy

Open Communication Essential to Progress in Creation-Evolution Controversy

Open Communication Essential to Progress in Creation-Evolution Controversy

Research Article| January 01 2003 Open Communication Essential to Progress in Creation-Evolution Controversy Donald Cronkite Donald Cronkite Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar The American Biology Teacher (2003) 65 (1): 9–10. https://doi.org/10.2307/4451424 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Donald Cronkite; Open Communication Essential to Progress in Creation-Evolution Controversy. The American Biology Teacher 1 January 2003; 65 (1): 9–10. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/4451424 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentThe American Biology Teacher Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright National Association of Biology Teachers Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

Perspective: evolution's struggle for existence in America's public schools.

The ongoing creation-evolution controversy in North America thrives on the widespread special creationist beliefs of a significant portion of the public. Creation science supports a literal interpretation of the Judeo-Christian Bible, an earth that is no more than 10.000 years old and created ex nihilo in six days by a monotheistic God, with no new kinds arising since the period of creation, and with a single flood of staggering force shaping layers of rocks and trapping the organisms fossilized within them. Despite decisions in numerous court cases that specifically exclude creationism and creation science from primary and secondary biology classes in America's public schools, creationists now work locally to minimize or remove evolution from science teaching standards. The nationally organized movement to resist the teaching of evolution has proven highly effective, influencing state and district school boards in addition to individual teachers and schools. Thus, if teaching about evolution and the nature of science is to survive in America's primary and secondary schools, scientists must likewise work with teachers and reach out to state and local school boards. In this perspective we outline the typical creationist arguments we encounter from students, teachers, school board members, and neighbors. We explain briefly how knowledge of both microevolution and macroevolution is important in medicine, agriculture, and biotechnology. We describe a science education controversy that arose within our own school district, how we responded, and what we learned from it. Finally, we argue that even modest outreach efforts to science teachers will be richly repaid.

PERSPECTIVE: EVOLUTION'S STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE IN AMERICA'S PUBLIC SCHOOLS

The ongoing creation-evolution controversy in North America thrives on the widespread special creationist beliefs of a significant portion of the public. Creation science supports a literal interpretation of the Judeo-Christian Bible, an earth that is no more than 10,000 years old and created ex nihilo in six days by a monotheistic God, with no new kinds arising since the period of creation, and with a single flood of staggering force shaping layers of rocks and trapping the organisms fossilized within them. Despite decisions in numerous court cases that specifically exclude creationism and creation science from primary and secondary biology classes in America's public schools, creationists now work locally to minimize or remove evolution from science teaching standards. The nationally organized movement to resist the teaching of evolution has proven highly effective, influencing state and district school boards in addition to individual teachers and schools. Thus, if teaching about evolution and the nature of science is to survive in America's primary and secondary schools, scientists must likewise work with teachers and reach out to state and local school boards. In this perspective we outline the typical creationist arguments we encounter from students, teachers, school board members, and neighbors. We explain briefly how knowledge of both microevolution and macroevolution is important in medicine, agriculture, and biotechnology. We describe a science education controversy that arose within our own school district, how we responded, and what we learned from it. Finally, we argue that even modest outreach efforts to science teachers will be richly repaid.Corresponding Editor: J. Mitton

The Politics of Anti-Creationism: The Committees of Correspondence

When the creationism issue rose to the surface in the late 1970s, an organized opposition to the creationist campaign came from an unexpected source. Local groups of rank and file evolution defenders, led by a retired biology teacher, organized a grassroots network of anti-creationism called the Committees of Correspondence. They basically approached the creationism issue as a political rather than a scientific problem and fought the battle on local fronts, where creationists were heavily engaged in legal campaigns to include their ideas in the public schools. Grassroots anti-creationism was, however, eventually replaced by a centralized national operation with an educational emphasis. In this paper, I will document the development of this neglected part of the creation-evolution controversy and discuss related issues, namely the politics of science that became clearly visible in the course of evolutionists' disputes over anti-creation strategies.

Evolution and Secular Humanism

anti-evolutionism, it is necessary to uncover the moral meanings invested in the term Secular Humanism, and then to see how evolution is thought to be articulated with those meanings. This paper addresses those problems by recounting the history of the fundamentalist idea of Secular Humanism; by describing the substantive content of that idea; and, by explaining how evolutionary thought is believed to be articulated with Secular Humanism. Modem American fundamentalism has made the creation-evolution controversy a moral issue by linking the idea of evolution to an idea called Secular Humanism. That connection animates contemporary anti-evolutionary thought by giving fundamentalist Christians a reason to believe that evolution is somehow involved in a long list of everything they consider immoral, from abortion to Zen. To appreciate the ideological basis of contemporary anti-evolutionism, it is necessary to understand that fundamentalist Christians explain moral decay in modem America by positing an evil conspiracy named Secular Humanism. Creationist thought, as a product of fundamentalism, is then an exercise in applying that moral critique and conspiracy theory to the ontological issue of origins, by alleging that belief in evolution is part of the Secular Humanist conspiracy. The plan of this paper is to explore creationist beliefs about evolution and Secular Humanism in two parts. Part I recounts the history of

Scientists on Creationism Scientists Confront Creationism Laurie R. Godfrey W. W. Norton Creationism, Science, and the Law: The Arkansas Case M. C. La Follette Science and Creationism Ashley Montagu The Creation Controversy: Science or Scripture in the Schools Dorothy Nelkin Did the Devil Make Darwin Do It? Modern Perspectives on the Creation-Evolution Controversy David B. Wilson Evolution vs. Creationism: The

Scientists on Creationism Scientists Confront Creationism Laurie R. Godfrey W. W. Norton Creationism, Science, and the Law: The Arkansas Case M. C. La Follette Science and Creationism Ashley Montagu The Creation Controversy: Science or Scripture in the Schools Dorothy Nelkin Did the Devil Make Darwin Do It? Modern Perspectives on the Creation-Evolution Controversy David B. Wilson Evolution vs. Creationism: The

The Creationist ControversyDid the Devil Make Darwin Do It? Modern Perspectives on the Creation-Evolution Controversy. David B. Wilson, Warren D. DolphinScience and Creationism. Ashley MontaguIs God a Creationist? The Religious Case against Creation-Science. Roland Mushat FryeA History of Modern Creationism. Henry M. Morris

Previous articleNext article No AccessSpecial Section on Science and ReligionThe Creationist Controversy Did the Devil Make Darwin Do It? Modern Perspectives on the Creation-Evolution Controversy. David B. Wilson, Warren D. Dolphin Science and Creationism. Ashley Montagu Is God a Creationist? The Religious Case against Creation-Science. Roland Mushat Frye A History of Modern Creationism. Henry M. MorrisRonald L. NumbersRonald L. Numbers Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by Isis Volume 76, Number 3Sep., 1985 Publication of the History of Science Society Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/353881 Views: 7Total views on this site Copyright 1985 History of Science Society, Inc.PDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.

David B. Wilson, ed. Did the devil make darwin do it? modern perspectives on the creation-evolution controversy. Ames: Iowa State University Press, 1983. xxii + 241 pp. $12.95 (paper)

Journal of the History of the Behavioral SciencesVolume 20, Issue 4 p. 388-390 Book Review David B. Wilson, ed. Did the devil make darwin do it? modern perspectives on the creation-evolution controversy. Ames: Iowa State University Press, 1983. xxii + 241 pp. $12.95 (paper) Rodney W. Kilcup, Rodney W. KilcupSearch for more papers by this author Rodney W. Kilcup, Rodney W. KilcupSearch for more papers by this author First published: October 1984 https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-6696(198410)20:4<388::AID-JHBS2300200414>3.0.CO;2-TAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume20, Issue4October 1984Pages 388-390 RelatedInformation

Did the Devil Make Darwin Do it? Modern Perspectives on the Creation-Evolution Controversy.David B. Wilson , Warren D. Dolphin

Previous articleNext article No AccessNew Biological BooksDid the Devil Make Darwin Do it? Modern Perspectives on the Creation-Evolution Controversy. David B. Wilson , Warren D. Dolphin Michael RuseMichael Ruse Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUS Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail SectionsMoreDetailsFiguresReferencesCited by The Quarterly Review of Biology Volume 59, Number 2Jun., 1984 Published in association with Stony Brook University Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/413807 Views: 2Total views on this site Copyright 1984 Stony Brook Foundation, Inc.PDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.