By now we've all heard many stories about the debate over the theory of evolution and its place in education. Much of what passes for a 'debate' over this issue is foolish, simplified, and too narrow in focus.

Here are, as I see it, the essential points about evolution and its place:

Evolution, as a process, is fact. Simple genetics describes processes happening all the time in nature where genetic traits shape the nature of offspring. This process is observable and is not at all speculative. My favorite way of explaining this is simply: do you believe that when two red-headed people have a child, that the child will always be red-headed as well? Yes? Then you believe in evolution. Science has proven how genes and dominant and recessive traits work, and over the course of time this process translates into evolution. It cannot not result in evolution--evolution is simply the cumulative outcome of all the various genetic mixes that are happening all the time.

The theoretical extension of evolution is not the same thing as the process of evolution. To scientists, as to everyone else, the origin of life is a mysterious subject which has been examined since the dawn of civilization. Scientists, observing the realities of genetic evolution & mutation and the fossil record of humans and other species, reason that since evolution is happening all the time, to step backward toward the dawn of life means to step backward through the evolutionary process. Evolution happens continuously, so to speculate about early humans, scientists logically reason that however things began, they began at the far end of the thousands of years of evolution that has happened since.

The theory of humankind's origin and evolution is precisely that--a theory. Any scientist worth their salt would say, of course it is--everything in science is at most a theory, even things we consider to be unshakably true in everyday life. The sum effect of many years of research and study has taken certain ideas about the origins of humankind--that we evolved from more primitive primate-like lifeforms, and that we share evolutionary connections with the primate family--past the point of being mere hypothesis and into the more solid--but still ultimately open-ended--realm of a theory. Once something is considered a theory in science, it typically moves into a phase that is more concerned with refining and explaining why and how the theoretical process works than with questioning its very validity--but it never becomes unquestionable or beyond doubt. There are no closed doors in science.

The theory of evolution is the theory currently accepted by the scientific world as the most plausible. This doesn't mean that every scientist agrees with it, simply that the theory has not yet been proven false by experiment and that the evidence observed and experimented with to date has made the current theory of evolution and natural selection the leading explanation of these issues. There are many scientists who, by virtue of their personal religious beliefs, believe that life on Earth has different origins than this theory describes. But removed from any belief system, removed from any preconceived notion of how things began, looking only at the physical evidence, this theory is the one which has held up the best under all forms of scientific scrutiny. Impartial religious scientists can look at this in a detached way and simply say, 'while I do not believe that the origins of life are random and explained by this theory, I acknowledge that the current state of our scientific observation doesn't suggest another explanation stronger than this one.' And there is the key.

Teaching or acknowledging the theory of evolution does not invalidate other ideas. When a student is taught the theory of evolution in school, they aren't being taught that their religious belief is wrong and that this one scientific theory should replace their beliefs. Instead they are simply being taught about the scientific process--that this is how science looks at a problem, and that after looking at the problem, this is the best explanation science can give. There is a world of difference between saying, 'this is the truth' and 'to the best of our ability to reason and experiment, this is what the scientific community at large believes to be the most plausible explanation for the physical phenomena we have observed.' The latter is what teaching the theory of evolution means. The student learns about how the scientific method works and what its distinct reliance on physical phenomena alone produces. The student doesn't learn the ultimate answer to life, the universe, and everything (we of course know that is '42'), but very simply this: what a finite number of scientists, observing a finite amount of physical evidence, deduce from that evidence.

Learning this theory is a starting point, not an end. Learning about the theory of evolution can be seen in two ways: as part of a passive education that involves simply being told what one is to believe or take as fact; or as part of a process that provides one with the tools that one needs to understand the context for scientific inquiry. It's my personal belief that many of the critics of the teaching of evolution theory approach education the first way--as simple indoctrination. But any honest education, just like any honest science, is about giving everyone the tools they need to think critically and act in an informed manner. Knowledge of what the theory of evolution is and how it was arrived at gives the student a starting point for understanding and critical evaluation of all science and its interrelated theories.

The only people who need fear the teaching of evolutionary theory in schools are those who believe either the students are not smart enough to form their own opinions on what they learn, or that they should only learn one small, narrow set of ideas and never be exposed to any others. This approach disrespects both the students and the integrity of the ideas--be they religious or alternate scientific notions--that the evolutionary skeptics seek to protect.

Labels: Culture