You are absolutely correct – it is a sticky wicket.   But to the extent that 
Christianity as a whole is viewed as a religion, albeit with many 
denominations, it is (perhaps –  always context dependent) worth at least 
dispelling the widespread notion that opposition to evolution is a universal 
Christian thing.  This is certainly the impression one gets from many elements 
of mainstream media, even those that know better.

William J. Resetarits, Jr.
Professor of Biology and
Henry L. and Grace Doherty Chair in Freshwater Research
Department of Biology
The University of Mississippi
P.O. Box 1848
University, MS 38677-1848
Phone: (662) 915-5804
Fax: (662) 915-6554
http://www.olemiss.edu/resetaritslab

Experiments are only experience carefully planned in advance.   R. A. Fisher

You can’t step twice in the same river.   Heraclitus

From: Malcolm McCallum 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Sunday, July 5, 2015 at 2:40 PM
To: William Resetarits <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] teaching evolution in ecology courses

I think the value of what you just mentioned is that most people don't know 
that there is no issue with their own religion and evolution.

However, where I was coming from is a step different from that, because most 
whose religion have no issue, end up having no issue.
However, there is a serious risk of the student thinking you are criticizing 
their religion, which will literally cause tons of grief.  When you say, plenty 
of religions have no problem with it, SOME (not all or even most) will 
interpret that more like "other religions have no problem, so what is wrong 
with yours?" or other sorts of imagined criticisms.  Its a real tight rope with 
some of the extreme religious views.  Also, I suspect that teh approach you 
take is going to be very dependent on the kind of student you are dealing with. 
 I suspect that the students you get at Ole Miss are significantly more 
prepared than a open (wide-open) enrollment university. The approaches to 
students are completely different.  I learned this going from LSUS to TAMUT to 
UMKC.  At UMKC students largely knew exactly why they were in school ad how to 
be their.  They were more prepared, but by NO MEANS were they on average 
smarter.  However, your approach would have worked well with most of them, I 
suspect.  IF students have poor academic backgrounds (in attainment or in 
exposure) their ability to interpret your motives are also poorly developed.  
At least that is my experience.  I'm sure others have plenty of other views.

On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 2:32 PM, wresetar 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
While care needs to be taken to avoid seeming confrontational, it may also be 
worth pointing out to students, if the issue arises, that even in this country 
a large majority of the populace belong to religions that do not consider their 
doctrine and the theory of evolution to be incompatible.  
http://www.pewforum.org/2009/02/04/religious-groups-views-on-evolution/

This is true even among the Christian population – so not everyone considers 
religion and evolution at odds.  I doubt many of those who reject evolution are 
remotely aware of this.

Then there is my personal favorite for mainstreaming evolution…  Sigh.  
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-_U7QmAM2W0g/UVFm9wyrWSI/AAAAAAAAjFg/EzTKrMO7nOg/s1600/DarwinTenPoundNote.jpg

William J. Resetarits, Jr.
Professor of Biology and
Henry L. and Grace Doherty Chair in Freshwater Research
Department of Biology
The University of Mississippi
P.O. Box 1848
University, MS 38677-1848
Phone: (662) 915-5804
Fax: (662) 915-6554
http://www.olemiss.edu/resetaritslab

Experiments are only experience carefully planned in advance.   R. A. Fisher

You can’t step twice in the same river.   Heraclitus

From: Malcolm McCallum 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Reply-To: Malcolm McCallum 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Sunday, July 5, 2015 at 12:07 PM
To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] teaching evolution in ecology courses

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]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[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.



--
Malcolm L. McCallum, PHD, REP
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