1. Is There a Political Argument for Teaching Evolution?
Science and Religion in Islam
2007
Is There a Political Argument for Teaching Evolution?
Taner Edis
Department of Physics
Truman State University
Taner Edis

2. US Creationism, Feb 2012
Indiana, Senate Bill 89: “The governing body of a school corporation may require the teaching of various theories concerning the origin of life, including creation science, within the school corporation.”
Alabama, Oklahoma, New Hampshire, …
All failed, or will fail. But they will be back.
2012
Trondheim

3. Science and Religion in Islam
2007
Popular, but limited
Large public support. (Gallup since 1980: 45% YEC, 45% guided evolution, 10% naturalistic evolution.)
Creationism and ID unacceptable in intellectual high culture.
Little penetration into public education (informal, private).
2012
Trondheim
Taner Edis

4. Science and Religion in Islam
2007
Islamic Creationism
“Harun Yahya” materials: Turkish origin, but internationally popular.
Denies common descent.
In part, borrows from Christian creationists.
2012
Trondheim
Taner Edis

5. Successful anti-evolution
Science and Religion in Islam
2007
Successful anti-evolution
Present in public education.
Some acceptance in intellectual high culture.
Even stronger popular, religious opposition.
2012
Trondheim
Taner Edis

6. Deplorable situation?
Scientists + left/liberal opposition to creationism.
Should give students best knowledge, determined by proper experts.
Public interest: prepare students for modern, national citizenship.
2012
Trondheim

7. Conservative resistance
Favor local, organic, religious communities; markets.
“Expertise” = bureaucracy, elite impositions.
Public education should be shaped by democratic, populist concerns.
2012
Trondheim

8. Politics of evolution education
US: liberal dominance in education. (Weakening.)
Turkey: conservative populism triumphant.
Iran, Pakistan: common descent in textbooks, protected by notions of divine guidance, limitations.
2012
Trondheim

9. Why teach evolution?
Can’t rely on common secular liberal outlook. (Maybe in Europe?)
Appeal to common material interests? Harm science  harm economy?
Religious conservatives often love technology.
2012
Trondheim

10. Need science literacy?
For democratic decision-making and knowledge economy.
Problems: Science education is too resource-intensive. We encourage deference to experts. Liberal bias…?
2012
Trondheim

11. Need STEM professionals?
Problems: No need for broad-based science education?
Basic science ≠ technology. Need applied science. (Islamic countries, US.)
Culture of applied science more conservative, religious. Includes creationism.
2012
Trondheim

12. Biomedical handicap?
Prospects for medical and biotechnological development.
Problems: “Evolutionary medicine” undeveloped. Medical schools don’t see need for evolution. Many doctors creationists.
2012
Trondheim

13. Technology corporations?
Will high-tech businesses avoid environments where science is not respected?
Dubious: Silicon Valley notorious for New Age. Indian middle class and Indian astrology etc.
Minor issue at best.
2012
Trondheim

14. Costs of basic science
Often costly to support without direct economic benefits. (Astronomy, evolutionary biology, …)
Costly in education.
Imposes steep cultural costs on conservative religious communities.
2012
Trondheim

15. Evolution is disruptive
Globally, conservative religious rejection of Darwinian evolution indicates cultural disruptiveness.
Social and political cost of interfering with religion is high.
2012
Trondheim

16. Liberal impasse
Liberal appeals to national-scale expertise are unpersuasive outside of a secular liberal constituency.
Difficulty with imposing secular liberal views by means of public education. Undemocratic? Coercive?
2012
Trondheim

17. Pseudoscience as protection
Creationism or guided-evolution views allow affirmation of technology, modernity, and many traditional beliefs.
Politically and socially, a low-cost, low-conflict solution?
2012
Trondheim

18. Compromising science
Scientific institutions, when conflicting with religions, cannot always claim a privileged political position.
Politically, compromising science education can be rational US & Turkey show such circumstances.
2012
Trondheim