You’re familiar with the way the Discovery Institute’s people — and other creationists — think. They rely on intuition — see The Magic of Design Intuition — and analogies — see Watchmaker analogy — and their personal impressions of how improbable the natural world is — see Discoveroids: The Odds Are Against Evolution. That kind of “thinking” leads them to their conclusion that life is a miracle, therefore Oogity Boogity!
This raw Subjectivism is quite unlike the way science works, so you can imagine our surprise at this new post at the Discoveroids’ creationist blog: Yale President Calls for Objectivity in Science Education, written by Sarah Chaffee, whom we call “Savvy Sarah.” Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:
A new article in Scientific American argues that “We Should Teach All Students, in Every Discipline, to Think Like Scientists.” The author, Peter Salovey, is notable. He is President of Yale University where he also teaches psychology. He might not welcome my saying so, but his emphasis on thinking critically and examining evidence is spot-on.
What? The Discoveroids favor scientific thinking? Savvy Sarah says:
Salovey wants Superhero Science. The picture with the article is a graphic of a female scientist standing on top of a building [It’s a church!] with her coat flowing behind her like a cape. His hope comes through in his first sentence: “If knowledge is power, scientists should easily be able to influence the behavior of others and world events.”
Ooooooooooooh! Influencing others — that appeals to the Discoveroids — if they’re the ones who do the influencing. She tells us:
The emphasis on “power” and “influencing behavior” sounds like an invitation to scientism, or worse. [Huh?] This innovation, for one, could easily be abused in the service of political and other agendas: [quote from the article]. Yet the article also calls for better science education and education in general. The language is excellent.
Where is Savvy Sarah going with this? She quotes some more from Scientific American:
Knowledge is power but only if individuals are able to analyze and compare information against their personal beliefs, are willing to champion data-driven decision making over ideology, and have access to a wealth of research findings to inform policy discussions and decisions.
What can a creationist do with that? For some reason, Savvy Sarah likes it. She continues:
Yes! Students learning to “weigh the quality and objectivity of data presented to them, and to change their minds when confronted with contrary evidence” as well as to “think critically and imaginatively about the world and to understand different viewpoints” — what a wonderful vision!
Huh? Then she links to the Discovery Institute’s Science Education Policy, which is essentially their demand that schools should Teach the Controversy. Somehow, we doubt that it’s what the President of Yale University has in mind.
Savvy Sarah ends with this:
If applied objectively [Hee hee!], this approach would enhance evolution education along with all parts of the curriculum! What do you say, Dr. Salovey?
The Discoveroids can hope, but we suspect that no one who matters is going to accommodate their desire to teach creationist fantasies as objective scientific theory.
Copyright © 2018. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.