If you’re a history buff, happened to see “Inherit the Wind (1960) on a rerun, or are from Tennessee, you probably understand the reference to monkeys. The anti-evolution folks are at it again.
This is The Economist’s way of reminding its readers of the so-called “Scopes Monkey Trial” in 1925, where two of America’s greatest mouthpieces, Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan argued over evolution. In previous blogs, The market has spoken—conclusively—on climate change and, Is there something peculiarly American about the rejection of science, I opined on questions of science.
You’d think time would dim those issues, but instead, it gets worse. My wife, who happened to be a graduate of the bastion of evangelicalism, W-----n College in the 1950s, used to roll her eyes at the subject. On a few occasions, she informed me that evolution was a given in her science classes at the school. When I asked how they dealt with their theology, she smiled wryly and said something to the point of god instituting evolution as the means of creation.
Obviously, it was never a question of significance to her. But how time has changed elsewhere. It’s worse now than it was in the ‘50s.
As The Economist writes, the Tennessee legislature has passed another of those bills about science. Rather, about questioning the entire discipline. The bill in question required the state’s education system to encourage students to “explore scientific questions” and “respond appropriately and respectfully to differences of opinion about scientific subjects.” It passed by big majorities in both Tennessee chambers, and the governor declined to veto it.
Though intelligent design and creationism are not mentioned, many are certain this is a back door, allowing teachers to introduce the subjects. I should say “reintroduce” those subjects. What is a bit surprising are the statistics about such bills. Since 2004, similar measures have been offered in 13 state legislatures. Only in one other state has the bill become law. Thankfully, Louisiana’s measure, which is law in the state, seems to have had no discernible effects. I say thankfully, because students who come to those conclusions will be limiting their future in science. That's especially true today, where the best vocational opportunities are in STEM careers (science, technology, engineering,and math). An engineering degree often requires an extensive science background in subjects of medical background, such as biology.
Flickr: photo by Doug888