I have no doubt that many who are from firm, literalistic religions have
this problem.

Early on when I was a student, I struggled with the conflict I thought
existed between religion and evolution. After taking a pile of evolution
coures I slowly transitioned.  IT was not a sudden lightbulb coming on.
 I think everyone deals with it differently when confronted with the logic
of evolution and how it sometimes conflicts with the dogma of some
religions.  I concluded as an instructor that I was not going to change in
a semester, a set of beliefs that this person has evolved over 18 or more
years of life.  I also kinda believe that many of the most intelligent are
the most stubborn to accept contrary views. So, my goal was not to
challenge those beliefs, but avoid the entire issue via a cop out.  Rather,
get the student to learn the facts they need to know and understand them.
For the most part, I was able to do this.

1) Most of my classes are entrenched in evolutionary biology as I often
bring it up even in A&P, but seldom ever have any problems, even though I
have taught it in some very bible beltish areas.  However, when I teach
ecology its there from day one, they know it is going to be there and I use
an abbreviated version of my introduction from general bio shpeal.  IN
general bio, I tell them, "I am not trying to change your beliefs, or turn
you into an athiest.  You have a right to believe whatever you want, I'm
not here to change what you believe.  I'm here to teach you biology, and
evolution is central to biology.  Whether you believe in evolution or not,
if you are in biology, you must understand it and you must know how it
works.  Besides, learning what it is and what it is not can only
strenghthen your beliefs because you are not blindly saying you don't
believe in something, instead you know what it is you don't believe.
Regardless, if you are going to be a biologist, MD, Nurse or dentist, you
must be versed in evolution, period.  IF you don't, you will not make it
through freshman biology.  This course is about learning what the science
of biology is about, it is not about religion.  Evolution is biology.  If
you do not learn it, your will be as successful in biology as someone who
can't add would be in mathematics.  You can disbelieve the laws of addition
all you want, but if you cannot follow their rules, you are not going to
make it through math.  Likewise, you must know the rules of evolution or
you will not make it."

This is in a lot of ways a cop out for both the instructor and the
student.  It allows the instructor to approach the issue without
challenging student beliefs, and it allows students who do not want to
believe, the opportunity to learn without the conflicting underlying moral
and emotional conflicts getting in the way. They are not being asked to
believe anything, they are being asked to repeat what they don't believe.
That is basically how I approach it.  THe commentary is not exactly worded
like that everytime, but that is pretty darn close.  It might not work for
every instructor, but it has for me (I think).

2) Of course, the first thing I do after this in freshman biology class is
tell them the downright basic idea of evolution is "things change over
time." I state that exact phrase everytime I teach it.  then, "A major
question in biology is why did they change?"

I then insert a simple example with dogs or cows or something very
familiar, "for example, we have tons of breeds of dogs.  They are all
different breeds, but they are all actually wolves, right? We know they are
wolves.  This is not new.  But, why have the breeds of dogs changed so much
over time?

Well, because a bunch of people chose to select some traits over others
while breeding them.  Some people wanted great sheep herders, others wanted
dogs that could run fast, or could rip your arm off.  So, they kept
breeding teh ones with the most muscular jaws or fastest speed or best
herding ability. Over time, this selective breeding led to pit bulls,
border collies, and greyhounds....all wolves!

In some cases, we have selected dogs so extremely that they are largely
incompatable for breeding.  For example, there is nothing stopping a Saint
Bernard sperm from fertilizing a chiuahua's egg (usually some giggles from
the class), but if it did, the resulting embryo may grow too big to pass
thorugh the birth canal, resulting in the death of the pup and mother.
Also, there are mechanical problems here that transcend that minor problem.
 (almost always there are giggles here by the class).  Obviously, the two
dogs cannot breed naturally anymore.

This same thing can happen in nature too.  For a ficticous example, you can
have one forest where dogs that are bigger survive better than little dogs
because the available prey are really big making it easier for big dogs to
get food.  In a nearby forest the opposite thing is hapening.  THere are
only a few prey species available, and the dogs must live off of these
measley little animals.  OVer time, smaller dogs do better and the smaller
they are the better they do in that forest, so the food supply continues to
select smaller and smaller dogs among the litters of pups.  The smaller dog
requires less food, so it can live off of these prey very easily, and the
bigger the dog the more food it needs, so the larger the dog, the worse it
does in that forest. Over time, teh selection due to the kinds of available
prey cause big dogs to largely disappear from the second forest leaving
smaller dogs.  The forests for some reason get re-connected after a long
time (centuries or millenia) and the two groups of dogs intermingle, one
bigger than a saint bernard, teh other smaller than a chihuahua.   They
won't interbreed due to mechanical reasons so largely, you will have the
start of two groups of animals changing over time or evolving to form tow
different and increasingly more divergent organsims.  Over thousands of
years, they may easily become so different as to be two separate species,
one a mouse-sized dog, the other a elephant-sized dog.

The only difference between the artifical selection that resulted in two
different dogs, and the natural selection that resulted in the same outcome
is the cause, or why the dogs changed over time or evolved.  That is how
evolution works, and it is pretty easy to understand how it works."

 3)  I've used this basic strategy since I first taught a college biology
class in 1995 (before I went back for a phd), and I have never had more
than an inquiry about evolution-religion conflicts.  They complain about
tests being too hard or having to read the book, like in anyone else's
class, but seldom ever about the evolution-religion issue.

In the very few times a student talked to me about the conflict, I just
tell him or her that its good that they have well-formed beliefs and I am
not asking you to believe anything.  In fact, you should not just blankly
accept what I tell you just because I or anyone else said it.  You should
require proof something is right or wrong. But, for this class you need to
be able to repeat what I tell you and what you read in class about
evolution and understand what it means.  I will say that I believe 90% of
telling them this is body language and manerisms that ensure them that I am
just wanting them to learn what they need to know.  It certainly defuses
nearly all conflicts.  YOu are just helping them learn what they need to
know for the tests.

Frankly, I don't see how someone can learn what evolution and natural
selection are and not conclude some level of acceptance, but everyone is
different, I am not going to change 20 years of religious learning, but I
can at least end up with an informed student walking out of my door at the
end of the semester.  Maybe that attitude has more to do with it than
anything?  Heck if I know.  All I know is that this has worked for me and
if it helps a student learn the material without moral conflicts to get in
the way, all the better.

On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 10:09 AM, David Inouye <[email protected]> wrote:

> It would be interesting to preface discussions of evolution in ecology
> courses with a few minutes about the cognitive differences considered in
> the paper mentioned in this NPR story:
>
>
> http://www.npr.org/sections/13.7/2015/06/29/418289762/don-t-believe-in-evolution-try-thinking-harder?utm_source=npr_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=20150705&utm_campaign=mostemailed&utm_term=nprnews
>
> I wonder whether some of the students I taught in introductory
> ecology/evolution who were resistant to the idea of evolution might have
> been influenced by this.
>
> David Inouye
>
>
> Dr. David W. Inouye, Professor Emeritus
> Department of Biology
> University of Maryland
> College Park, MD 20742-4415
>
> 2014-15: President, Ecological Society of America
>
> Principal Investigator
> Rocky Mtn. Biological Laboratory
> PO Box 519
> Crested Butte, CO 81224
>
> [email protected]
> 301-405-6946




-- 
Malcolm L. McCallum, PHD, REP
Environmental Studies Program
Green Mountain College
Poultney, Vermont
Link to online CV and portfolio :
https://www.visualcv.com/malcolm-mc-callum?access=18A9RYkDGxO

 “Nothing is more priceless and worthy of preservation than the rich array
of animal life with which our country has been blessed. It is a
many-faceted treasure, of value to scholars, scientists, and nature lovers
alike, and it forms a vital part of the heritage we all share as Americans.”
-President Richard Nixon upon signing the Endangered Species Act of 1973
into law.

"Peer pressure is designed to contain anyone with a sense of drive" - Allan
Nation

1880's: "There's lots of good fish in the sea"  W.S. Gilbert
1990's:  Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss,
            and pollution.
2000:  Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction
          MAY help restore populations.
2022: Soylent Green is People!

The Seven Blunders of the World (Mohandas Gandhi)
Wealth w/o work
Pleasure w/o conscience
Knowledge w/o character
Commerce w/o morality
Science w/o humanity
Worship w/o sacrifice
Politics w/o principle

Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any
attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
contain confidential and privileged information.  Any unauthorized
review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.  If you are not
the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and
destroy all copies of the original message.

Reply via email to