Public Schools in the United states can be a very touchy subject when trying to discuss what can and what cannot be learned, such as sexual education, teaching in Spanish for Latino based school, and of course evolution. Evolution in a biological sense is defined as the change in the gene pool of a population from generation to generation by such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift (Cobb). So why is there a problem with this scientific statement? Children learn about the laws of gravity and matter, and there is no debate over that topic but, when considering what our children learn about the origins of life there is major disagreement. Whether biologists in schools are teaching children this as fact or theory can be an issue within itself, so, we must direct our attention to the idea if children are learning this as a basic scientific fundamental then shouldn’t we have to include other options like, Creationism and Intelligent Design? Can it even be possible to have both of these taught without making the situation in public schools more awkward and seeming confusing more than it already is for anxious teens and pre-teens? Each one of these theories holds ground in the American mentality in numerous ways, separation of church and state, morals, ethics, and about 50% of Americans has some sort of belief in god and divine intervention in terms of our beginning. So lets us address these questions by weighing the pros and cons of both sides and see if there is some sort of justification for one or the other or for both to be taught in schools.
Since the “Scopes Monkey trial” in 1925 evolution has been allowed to be taught in public institutions as biological theory. It is the frame work and foundation for modern scientific method when discussing where we came from and what started this change. As a theory itself it teaches a rational reductionalism thought - i.e. humans themselves can be broken down to something smaller and the more it is broken down the more we can see were the change occurs (mutation of cells) to show where we are now. Though somewhat blocked by its own limitations, Neo-Darwinian theory is no different than any other scientific rational and theory. Though to adopt such a belief one must look at what frame oneself must have in order to conceive this idea of evolution.
To say we evolved from a purely naturalistic way leaves no room for any justification elsewhere. We have, will, and can have only evolved from dead matter blocks out any form of supernaturalism or conscious matter. It is a purely uniformitarian way of scientific method (Griffin). With this in mind we can see that there are going to be many problems and advantages to teaching this sort of evolution frame of thought.
The advantages to this problem can help with the discipline of what one is learning (such as biology, physical anthropology, and maybe even geology) by giving you a foundation of thought that you are...