WE HAVE ANOTHER tragically foolish blog article from the neo-theocrats at the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture. This one is Are We Talking about Science, or Scientific Materialism? It begins with a bit of — shall we say — misdirection:
“We should teach only science in the science classroom.” Of course, who would disagree?
All rational observers of the Discoveroids know full well that it’s the Discoveroids themselves who disagree. As their Wedge Strategy discloses, they want some kind of whacked-out spiritualistic dogma to become the new model of science. The blog article continues:
As Dr. Rebecca Keller, CEO of textbook publisher Gravitas Publications, explains,
The philosophical aspects of science are usually not discussed in elementary or high school grades and for that matter, neither are they taught to scientists. Most people and most scientists are completely unaware that science is any different than the philosophies that are currently masquerading as science.
We clicked on that link to Gravitas Publications. They sell books for the homeschool market. In their FAQ section we find this revealing information:
Where does Real Science-4-Kids stand on the debate of creation vs evolution vs intelligent design?
Science can be divided into two parts: 1) the practice of science and 2) the interpretation of science. The practice of science addresses gathering information about the world around us, while the interpretation of science concerns what that information means to the discipline of science, to individuals and to society. Real Science-4-Kids focuses on the first part (the practice of science) by teaching students what is currently known about the world and how it is known. Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design are interpretive frameworks for understanding scientific information and, as such, fall mainly in the second part. Real Science-4-Kids does not adhere to any of the three interpretative frameworks but instead presents students with the most accurate, up-to-date information available which focuses on the practice of science. The interpretation of that information is left to students and parents.
In other words, they’re a creationist publisher. And the Discoveroids are using them as a source of philosophical insight. Anyone surprised?