Yesterday, Dr Cornelius Hunter headlined (full story here) how a Washington, DC-based, bipartisan Governor- and Captains of Industry- led Next Generation Science Standards initiative is pushing for an evolutionary materialism-loaded programme of science standards.
The standards are intended to be accepted and adopted “in whole, without alteration.”
A clear warning sign in an age of ever so many agendas being pushed on us as “solutions” to real or imaginary crises A to Z.
The warning flag is tripped for good reason. For, a s CH documents, the proposed standards include:
Anatomical similarities and differences between various organisms living today, and between them and organisms in the fossil record, enable the reconstruction of evolutionary history and the inference of lines of evolutionary descent . . . . Genetic information, like the fossil record, also provides evidence of evolution. DNA sequences vary among species, but there are many overlaps; in fact, the ongoing branching that produces multiple lines of descent can be inferred by comparing the DNA sequences of different organisms. Such information is also derivable from the similarities and differences in amino acid sequences and from anatomical and embryological evidence . . . . The section begins with a discussion of the converging evidence for common ancestry that has emerged from a variety of sources (e.g., comparative anatomy and embryology, molecular biology and genetics) . . . . Finally, the core ideas in the life sciences culminate with the principle that evolution can explain how the diversity that is observed within species has led to the diversity of life across species through a process of descent with adaptive modification. Evolution also accounts for the remarkable similarity of the fundamental characteristics of all species . . .
To make such confident manner assertions, the inherent limitations of the logic of inductive reasoning highlighted by Newton in Principia and in Opticks are ignored. The further limitation that on matters of origins we deal with an unobserved past that we are trying to model based on traces in the present and inference to best explanation — ideally, on demonstrated adequate cause (but, no-one has demonstrated body plan macro-evolution on Neo-darwinian or similar mechanisms) — has not been adequately discussed. And of course, the demonstrated adequate cause — the ONLY demonstrated, adequate cause — for functionally specific, complex information and associated information [FSCO/I] is suppressed.
In short, the perceived — and in some aspects, real — educational crisis is being exploited to push through an evolutionary materialist ideological agenda dressed up in the holy lab coat and wielding sticks of chalk at the chalk board.
I responded to CH, as follows (I add illustrations, which UD’s comments do not allow):
____________
>>. . . the USA is embarking on an unprecedented level of tertiary education.
100 or even 50 years ago, you were not trying to push nigh on half your age cohorts through to Colleges. So, I suspect, part of the issue is the attempt to do mass tertiary education instead of the older skim the cream approach.
My own solution/suggestion [cf here also for a part time version, and here for the Dip. Ed/ M. Ed to retool people to teach and administer] as a curriculum architect has been: do second chance secondary studies and then move up to tertiary level by a bridge programme. (Other people — IMO — should be doing a modern apprenticeship in a skilled trade, with a qualification ladder that gives the equivalent of an Associate at some definite point.)
That way, you set up a viable bridge that solves problems before you hit the fast-paced, demanding college level. And, given the difference in economics [notice, your education debt crisis], I am inclined towards reaching up, through community colleges then transition to degree completion and onward to the Masters level which has now become the real threshold for professional praxis.
In addition, I note, there is a coming wave of Android Tablets that can work with wireless networks, digital libraries {cf. here, also}, ebooks etc to be a viable education platform that transforms cost and accessibility of learning resources. This wave is kicking in over the next year or two.
So, while there are genuine problems, I think part of this is the usual pressure group spin tactic: to get your change on the agenda, create a [perceived] crisis. Similarly, “never let a good crisis go to waste.”
Of course, a crisis is the best time to carry out a coup; especially if there is a panic and there is a cluster of factions that can be mobilised to push through the agenda. (A current example is how the Arab Spring is rapidly becoming an un-headlined IslamIST winter, in Egypt and elsewhere.)
So, let us observe: there is an education debt-crisis, and there is a broader economic malaise (in significant part triggered by foolish ideologically motivated interventions in the market place leading to bubbles and collapses).
I do not doubt that there are rafts of ideologues out there who perceive an opportunity to push through their agendas.
CH has headlined one of them, a push to swallow whole an alleged national high school curriculum reform, one that is chock full of evolutionary materialist dogma pushed in the name of sound science. As we can clip from his onward linked personal blog post:
Anatomical similarities and differences between various organisms living today, and between them and organisms in the fossil record, enable the reconstruction of evolutionary history and the inference of lines of evolutionary descent . . . . Genetic information, like the fossil record, also provides evidence of evolution. DNA sequences vary among species, but there are many overlaps; in fact, the ongoing branching that produces multiple lines of descent can be inferred by comparing the DNA sequences of different organisms. Such information is also derivable from the similarities and differences in amino acid sequences and from anatomical and embryological evidence . . . . The section begins with a discussion of the converging evidence for common ancestry that has emerged from a variety of sources (e.g., comparative anatomy and embryology, molecular biology and genetics) . . . . Finally, the core ideas in the life sciences culminate with the principle that evolution can explain how the diversity that is observed within species has led to the diversity of life across species through a process of descent with adaptive modification. Evolution also accounts for the remarkable similarity of the fundamental characteristics of all species . . .
Of course, the gaps, contradictory evidence, inherent limitations and a priori materialist ideology dressed up in the holy lab coat are not identified as topics for discussion. No, that is “creationism,” a loaded code word.
Materialist indoctrination, not education.
And that is expected to prepare our civilisation’s youth for higher education and the challenging global jobs market?
All, duly rubber-stamped by a bi-partisan group of state governors [say the magic word: “consensus”] and a sprinkling of some captains of industry.
Any properly trained Alinsky Rules for Radicals method “Community Organizer” would be drooling at the prospect.
But, then, that should be no surprise, in 2000 the US National Science Teachers Association [NSTA] Board went on record on their agenda:
The principal product of science is knowledge in the form of naturalistic concepts and the laws and theories related to those concepts [–> redefines science as applied materialist ideology] . . . .
[[S]cience [–> so redefined] , along with its methods, explanations and generalizations, must be the sole focus of instruction in science classes [–> ideological lock-in] to the exclusion of all non-scientific or pseudoscientific [–> loaded language] methods, explanations, generalizations and products [–> neatly left off: the warrant for the scientific method, so-called, is a matter of epistemology and the logic of induction, which are PHILOSOPHICAL concerns, and require a different method, comparative difficulties across competing alternatives that have a right to sit to the table, not by sufferance of the ideologues in the holy lab coat]. . . .
Although no single universal step-by-step scientific method captures the complexity of doing science, a number of shared values and perspectives characterize a scientific approach to understanding nature. Among these are a demand for naturalistic explanations supported by empirical evidence that are, at least in principle, testable against the natural world. [–> further ideological lock-in of materialism] Other shared elements include observations, rational argument, inference, skepticism, peer review and replicability of work . . . .
Science, by definition, is limited to naturalistic methods and explanations [–> Even more materialistic ideology lock-in] and, as such, is precluded from using supernatural elements [–> willfully loaded language, the real alternative since 360 BC is Plato’s Nature vs ART, and — as arson investigators, forensic scientists, and archaeologists routinely practice — art is eminently suitable for scientific investigation on empirical signs. and NSTA’s board knew or was responsible to have known this.] in the production of scientific knowledge. [[NSTA, Board of Directors, July 2000. Emphases added.]
So, when we see a demand for “standards” for science education that are to be taken:
“in whole, without alteration”
. . . we have a right to be highly suspicious.
What can we do?
We are dealing with ideologues in full agenda-push mode in the face of crises that are the now traditional vehicle for radical change.
Such can be exposed and stopped, if there is a balance of forces adequate for the task; but, we should know that if professional ideologues sense that the time and trends are right for their push, they think they have good prospects for success.
If their momentum cannot be broken, then it is time to secede.
There is absolutely no reason why in the USA an alternative system of education from K to MS, cannot be created, built on what is already in place. Especially where there is now a broadband digital infrastructure to back it up.
{Added: an easily implemented community based multimedia seminar room for a network of such institutions could be:
(Also cf. here.)}
But for that to work, people in a critical mass have to see that we are dealing with ideological empire building and coups that are driven by ruthless agendas, not by sound considerations.
So, the first thing is that there needs to be a broad, community based programme of education in origins science from a design theory perspective, independent of the materialist ideologue-dominated systems. (Try this for a first, rough draft.)
Such a programme should target two main groups: (i) educators for the new approach, (ii) students needing a balance in their science education that will counterweight the indoctrination they are going to get anyway. In addition, it should target the sort of community leadership that will be the core of the critical mass to get an alternative going.
So, if the ideologues insist on being unreasonable and have the power to capture the schools as temples of materialism, let them discover that the temples are increasingly empty.
And if they try to impose their agenda on that which is independent of their control, based on slander campaigns, that shows them up as ruthless nihilistic tyrants, to be stoutly exposed and resisted.
Enough is enough . . . >>
____________
I am convinced that our civilisation stands at a civilisational watershed. And by the forces that are at work at such a divide, once you are on different sides of the line, you will be forced farther and farther apart. In the case of the US’ education systems, there is an entrenched, ideologically driven power elite that cannot be removed by any ordinary means. That means, an alternative has to be built, on fresh ground.
Just as in1776, the separation from the regime of George III reached a point of no return.
Let us therefore remind ourselves of the principles on which the US founders took their stance, and the principle on which they built a new founding, on a green field site, so to speak:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. –That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security . . .
That is, there is a right and responsibility of genuine reform, and if remonstrances cannot move the hearts and minds of those who wield power, a right to found a new alternative on a sounder foundation.
It looks to me — given the proverbial “long train of abuses and usurpations” — uncommonly like the time has come for that.
So, the question we need to ask ourselves, given what is happening on ever so many fronts is: “if not now, then when? if not here, then where? if not us, then who?” END