Creationism with Evolution

Creationism vs. Evolution has been an ongoing argument for a long time. The goal of this paper is not to debate the validity of either argument; rather it is to explain why both sides of the argument should be taught together. To properly discuss this subject a basic knowledge of what Creationism and what Evolution is needed. Webster's defines the terms as follows: Creationism is the belief that God created everything, while Evolution is "a process in which the whole universe is a progression of interrelated phenomena" (Webster's)

Depending on the home life a student, he or she is taught about Creationism or Evolution from birth. Therefore, by the time a student reaches school age he or she is indoctrinated by their parents' belief system. When the subject is broached in a school setting as only one or the other being the only one that is right, it can be confusing and put a strain on a student's comprehension of the subject. By giving students an unbiased view of both sides of the argument, you are allowing them to explore their own beliefs and open the door for further scientific exploration into Creationism and Evolution.

On the surface Creationism seems to be purely faith based, while Evolution is scientifically based, this is not necessarily the case. Creation Science looks into both, debunking the science behind evolution, and building the scientific proof of creation. One major point that is made is that the earth is only about 10,000 years old, based upon the fact that no one was around 4.5 million years ago to observe the development of the strata. This argument can also be turned around and used for Evolution since there were no creationists around 10,000 years ago to observe creation, as they believe it occurred. (Moore 169-170) Charles Darwin is commonly known as the "Father of Evolution" he wrote "The Origins of the Species"; Darwin speaks of natural selection, which is a form of microevolution. Darwin provides no proof for macroevolution in his book, although many people associate Darwin with macroevolution. There is scientific proof of microevolution/natural selection. If it were not for microevolution, we would not have different breeds of dogs, butterflies with different patterns on their wings, or fish with different characteristics. All of these differences and too many to list; have to do with the unfavorable traits of creatures getting them killed prior to them being able to mate and pass on their genetics. Commonly the better-disguised animal or better equipped for the task they were needed to do, had the opportunity to pass on their genetics.

With both Creationism and Evolution having at least some basis in science and observation, partnered with the faith basis of both it should be understandable how teaching only one or the other could be considered teaching Religion. This could not only cause emotional distress for the child at school but also cause distress for the parents at home trying to explain to their child why they were being taught something outrageously different from what they were taught at home. With the origin of life is the basis to which all science is based, confusing a child early in the process could be detrimental to their understanding of science as a subject.

Taking all of this evidence into consideration, it seems that teaching both creationism and evolution in an unbiased classroom setting, could not only save students undo confusion, but could also encourage them to look further into the science behind both. Exploration in one subject can lead to exploration into other subjects, which can help students develop their own ideas and theories on an uncountable number of things not just science.

Works Cited

"Creationism - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary." Dictionary and Thesaurus - Merriam-Webster Online. 21 Apr. 2009 <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Creationism>.
Darwin, Charles. On the Origin of Species: By Means of Natural Selection (Thrift Edition). New York: Dover Publications, 2006.
Moore, John A.. From Genesis to Genetics: The Case of Evolution and Creationism. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003.
"Evolution - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary." Dictionary and Thesaurus - Merriam-Webster Online. 21 Apr. 2009 <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/evolution>.

To Choose or Not to Choose

Choosing sides in the Creationism v. Evolution argument is essential in the classroom setting. Creationism is a faith-based belief that God created everything, while Evolution is a Science based belief of how life started. Evolution can be separated into several subtypes, two of which being, microevolution and macroevolution. Microevolution is explained in "The Origin of the Species", as natural selection. Macroevolution is defined as large-scale evolution outside the normal realm of microevolution.

Teaching Creationism and Evolution in a classroom setting has the ability to lead to confusion in young students, who are not completely certain as to where they stand in the Creationism v. Evolution argument. By integrating the two theories, in the classroom, it is forcing the blatant contradictions of the two arguments into the light. This has the ability to lead into classroom debates, which could interfere with normal classroom activities. The following discourse, depending on the age of the students, has the chance to stunt a students' understanding of biology on the basic level. By choosing to teach either Creationism or Evolution, the risk of confusion is greatly diminished.

Occam's razor is a scientific and philosophical rule that states if all things are equal, the answer requiring the fewest jumps in logic is normally correct. When dealing with teaching Evolution and Creationism together the theories are so opposite of each other and both require several leaps in logic, in order to get to the beginning. If, it is accepted that Evolution and Creationism are both theories about the beginning of life, then it is reasonable to accept one of them to be correct. The question needs to be asked, "What should be considered a jump in logic?" For some individuals the simple answer to the beginning of life is "God created all of this" is logical and requires no jump, for others, the belief that life came from the primordial soup is logical. These are vastly different examples and one of them would have to require a jump in logic, both theories simply cannot be correct.

As previously stated; Creationism is a faith based theory, largely upheld by the Judeo-Christian Church. By solely teaching Creationism in the classroom, the State is placing itself in a precarious situation that has the propensity to breach the Separation of Church and State. This argument could also be placed on Evolution, seeing, as there are individuals who practice Science as their religion. Teaching any religious theory as fact, especially to impressionable students, is irresponsible. Learning Institutions, publicly funded or privately funded, should openly choose a side of the Creationism v. Evolution argument in order to aide parents in make an educated decision on what they should tell their children or which learning venue their children should attend. In order to protect themselves from breaching the Wall of Separation, teachers and Learning Institutions should be given an option to teach neither Evolution nor Creationism, since both are merely theories.

When it comes to discussing Creationism and Evolution there is a gray area, in general, individuals consider their beliefs on the beginning of life to be fact, while the reality is their beliefs are theories inside theories. It is possible, that since Creationism and Evolution are both theories that it should not be required to be taught in the classroom at all, much less together. Having a working knowledge of Evolution as the basis of life has nothing to do with understanding biology as a whole, if biology was based entirely on Evolution and its theories then biology would therefore be a theory. If this argument were based on Creationism as the basis of life and so forth, biology would still be merely a theory. Since it has been established that there is life, therefore the study of life then it can be deduced that biology is not a theory. In order to bypass all of the turmoil associated with only teaching one, the other or both, it is suggested to teach neither, establish biology from the cellular level, not the beginning of life.

Works Cited

Darwin, Charles. The Origin Of Species. New York: Signet Classics, 2003.

HUTSON, JAMES. "'A Wall of Separation' (June 1998) - Library of Congress Information Bulletin." Library of Congress Home. 29 Apr. 2009 <http://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danbury.html>.

"Occam's Razor - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary." Dictionary and Thesaurus - Merriam-Webster Online. 29 Apr. 2009 <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Occam%27s%20Razor>.

"Primordial soup - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary." Dictionary and Thesaurus - Merriam-Webster Online. 29 Apr. 2009 <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Primordial%20soup>.