THE battle between scientists and so-called 鈥渃reation scientists鈥� over
the teaching of evolution in America鈥檚 schools looked like it was over some time
ago. After all, the courts have ruled that creation science is not science and
that it is illegal to require it to be taught as an alternative to
evolution.
But what the courts cannot do is to remove the pressure on teachers from
religious groups. All too often teachers try to find a way out by just omitting
the 鈥渃ontroversial鈥� topic of evolution.
So congratulations to the National Academy of Sciences for its excellent new
report Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science,
which should stiffen the resolve of teachers. The report does not attack
religion but tries to explain the scientific method and so separate science from
religion. That leaves the report able to answer the question 鈥淐an a person
believe in God and still accept evolution?鈥� with a reassuring 鈥淢any people
believe that God works through the process of evolution. That is, God has
created both a world that is ever-changing and a mechanism through which
creatures can adapt . . .鈥�
Advertisement
And the report neatly answers why creation science cannot be taught in
schools: every religion has a different idea about creation and because schools
are required to be 鈥渞eligiously neutral鈥�, no one creationist view can be
presented as truer than any other.
Still, it is doubtful that the religious will feel truly reassured by trains
of thought set in motion by these answers. While evolutionary biologists can
leave God with the job of creating the world, cosmologists might argue that
God鈥檚 job would have to end at the big bang. And the fact that there are many
religions, each claiming the truth, is one of the chief obstacles to believing
in any of them.
It is the nature of science to ask endless questions and of religion to have
fixed tenets. Their coexistence is never going to be comfortable, but the
academy鈥檚 efforts should at least make it easier to teach evolution.