Should Creationism and Evolution Get Equal Time in Schools?

Should Creationism and Evolution Get Equal Time in Schools?

Introduction and general information about the topic

The Creation-Evolution controversy is a recurring dispute about the origins of Earth, humanity, life and the universe. While evolution is a theory that tries to explain such origins, creationism is taken as-is strictly from religious books - the Bible. The legal status of creation and evolution in public education is the subject of a great deal of debate in legal, political, and religious circles. The situation ranges from countries not permitting the teaching of evolution at all to teaching it like any other science. The resistance to teaching evolution is more or less related to the level of religious fundamentalism present in such countries. In Western countries it has mainly been controversial in the United States.

Creationism is more or less a doctrine or religious belief that everything (humanity, universe, etc) was created in their original form by a deity (or deities). With respect to the controversy creationism rejects the theory of evolution and takes Genesis literally. On the other hand evolution is a scientific theory (part of it proven) that life and the universe follows a natural path of changes and disapproves the creationist belief of a divine intervention that created everything. The evolutionist theory became popular with Darwin's book "On the Origin of Species".

So, simply put, there are 2 main sides at the core of the debate of whether creationism and evolution should share equal time in schools. On one side there are the "natural" theorists (scientists who support the evolutionist theory) and on the other side there are the "supernatural" believers (creationists).

Throughout time both evolutionists and creationists have published their theories and ideas as books, magazines, articles, etc. However, there was, and still is, a clear distinction between such published works - the evolutionist materials are more scientific and technical while the creationist materials tend to be simpler, less technical, but more religious. After researching a fair amount of resources I have concluded that there are less scholarly materials on creationism than there are on evolution. For this reason I have chosen authors that published creationist materials through academic or research organizations as presented below.

Creationism in scholarly articles

Before presenting the scholarly articles that make a statement for teaching creationism some terminology must be explained first. The term "intelligent design" is used as an equivalent to creationism in recent decades (but it is seen as a theory that nature and complex biological structures were designed by intelligent beings). Also the terms creationists and evolutionists refer to believers or supporters of creationism and evolution, respectively.

Teaching creationism in public schools has been an important issue mainly in the United States because of its decentralized education system. The Institute for Creation Research (ICR) is specializing in the study of scientific creationism, Biblical creationism and related fields. ICR states on their website that the universe was supernaturally created by a triune God. Duane Gish, Senior VP Emeritus, asks: "Who made the stars? God make the stars. There is only one way we know stars exist... the Bible says God created them" [1]. With such an ideology in mind Duane Gish strongly believes that intelligent design should be taught alongside evolution in public schools to ensure that students can choose which theory to believe. Gish argues that if creation must be excluded from science texts and discussions, then evolution must be excluded as well [2]. There were many trials lost by creationists in the US to introduce its study in public education mostly because creationism is itself defined through religion and belief and students cannot be forced to accept it. However, there continue to be numerous efforts to introduce creationism in US classrooms.

A profoundly important factor for introducing creationism in public education is religious ideology. Creationists see themselves as very religious people. The factors of religious identification and ideology are regarded as crucial to the influence of teaching creationism [3]. In fact the shared ideology is what started the creationist movement. Despite their many theological differences, creationists tend to share a doctrinal emphasis on the Bible as the repository of divine revelation [3].

Many proponents of the intelligent design movement support requiring that it should be taught in the public schools. For example, the Discovery Institute and Phillip E. Johnson, support the policy of "Teach the Controversy", which entails presenting to students evidence for and against evolution, and then encouraging students to evaluate that evidence themselves.

____________________________________________________________________________________

1. Gish, D., Dish. D., Snellenberger, E., Snellenberger, B. "The Amazing Story of Creation: From Science and the Bible", Page 11, Chapter 1

2. Gish, D. (2000). "Creationist Science and Education". Twenty Questions: An Introduction To Philosophy. Fourth Edition. Eds. G. Lee Bowie, Meredith W. Michael, Robert Solomon. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers. Pages 146-157.

3. Coleman, S., Carlin, L. (2004). "The Cultures of Creationism: Anti-Evolution in English-Speaking Countries". Ashgate Publishing. Pages 67 - 70.

Johnson states that:

"If we understand our times, we will know that we should affirm the reality of God by challenging the domination of materialism and naturalism in the world of the mind." [4]

Johnson is best known as one of the founders of the intelligent design movement and has advocated strongly in the public and political spheres for the teaching of intelligent design in favour of evolution.

Creationism in popular press

Most of the creationists and supporters of intelligent design believe that there are too many "missing links" in Darwin's evolution theory and that its study shouldn't be the sole explanation of the creation of life and the universe. In an interview for the Wired magazine George Glider believes that "The Darwinist materialist paradigm, however, is about to face the same revolution that Newtonian physics faced 100 years ago". Glider believes that intelligent design at least asks the right questions [5].