The Whys of Evolution

When I teach evolution, I do so without religious underpinnings. The only way to protect the religious beliefs of individuals in the public school is to ONLY teach what we know about the subject. If a student begins to questions his/her religious views, then that is a discussion for the student, the student's family and their church/whatever. Evolution does not say "god(s) doesn't/don't exist". It follows good science that only relies on natural phenomena and natural laws. Only by staying objective does science provide us with the truth of this world.Your three "possibilities" of why omit other belief systems that do not believe in one intelligent designer or non-atheists who believe in other creation scenarios. The only way to be certain of not infringing on anyone's beliefs is to stick to the naturalistic science at hand.

I agree that the "why" should be left to other classes such as philosophy and comparative religion. The only problem is that the importance of these classes is low on the priority list of public educators. One problem is what we call the "glut of electives" in high school when there are so many electives to choose from that hardly any of them get filled up and have to be dropped anyway. Also, different pathways (which are all the rage now) pick the electives you take for you. With the way high school is structured, more electives is not always an option.Other examples besides pantheism--I think one would be Wicca. The student I had last year whose parents were wiccans said that their creation story just involved the Earth and nature appearing of its own will. No creator, just the creation for itself. I don't think that he would fit into one of the three categories of "why?" What do you think?

The Wiccan ideas on creation could fit evolution after initial creation. Evolution starts with what is there not exactly how everything originated. So, the initial why's of evolution could be considered a moot point since evolution does not deal with an initial creation event. What the why's would deal with would most likely be, in my mind, the purpose of evolution. Since evolution through natural selection and other naturalistic processes is not purposeful in a teleological sense, then why are we discussing why's after all. This 'debate' would involve, as you have said before, a philosophical issue.After thinking about it, I don't see why evolution would need a why! Does the cell theory need a why? Does gravity need a why? Special relativity? General relativity? As "thinking man", most people need a why for almost everything. Just because our intelligence is a result of naturalistic processes doesn't mean that those processes have to have a reason to operate.Thank you for thinking so positively about my objectivity. I don't know how objective I am, but I will keep my opinions away from my students. Thanks

I agree with you that a lot of people are searching for the why of their existence. Some find it in religion. Some find it in other belief systems. I guess I am just a person who doesn't ask "why do I exist?", I just exist and go from there.You have said this before, and I applaud you for it, that this is not a topic for science class. The problem, though, is that many people think it should be a question that permeates every subject of education that might oppose or disagree with their sense of purposeful existence. Most people cannot live with the idea that there is no purpose in their lives or no meaning behind their existence. If you are a biblical literalist, then Genesis has to be true or your existence might be meaningless. I've read where groups in Texas have argued against Social Studies textbooks that say humans were hunter-gathers before farmers because Cain and Able were farmers! The same people have argued that we should not use the metric system b/c Jesus had 12 apostles and not 10! Where does it end? Are a group's beliefs in the importance of their existence a justification to teach those beliefs to others, especially if that group believes that all of existence depends on their viewpoint?Take care.