Book Review Editor's NoteAs a chemistry instructor, you may not consider the conflict between science and religion when you are preparing for class, but you might be surprised at your students' views on the matter. For some insight, consider reading Secularism and Science in the 21st Century, edited by Ariela Keysar and Barry A. Kosmin. This month the eighth edition of a popular general chemistry textbook, Chemistry, by Stephen S. Zumdahl and Susan A. Zumdahl, is reviewed. Do you teach a chemistry course for allied health majors? Reviews of new editions of two general–organic–bio books are included: The ninth edition of Introduction to General, Organic, and Biochemistry by Frederick A. Bettelheim, William H. Brown, Mary K. Campbell, and Shawn O. Farrell, and the fifth edition of General, Organic, and Biological Chemistry by H. Stephen Stoker.
 Hardly a year goes by without media headlines about an attempt by some state board of education to deal with teaching evolution in the context of a clash between science and religion. As I write this review Texas is trying to decide whether the strengths and weaknesses of scientific theories may be taught. If geology were a more common public school subject, undoubtedly there would be school board discussions on teaching plate tectonics, the origin of inland fossil beds, and the origin of the Grand Canyon. The newly elected U.S. President has urged America to restore science to its rightful place (1). Secularism and Science in the 21st Century seeks to play a role in the restoration by providing scientists a model for teaching and policy formation.National poll results presented in this book indicate that over half of U.S. citizens believe the Bible to be literal truth and that the universe is but a few thousand years old. You may quibble with the poll numbers, but even if they were anywhere near correct, the results are startling. Does this attitude make you think that you should teach introductory science courses differently? The conflict between the Christian biblical view and modern science is particularly strong in the U.S. This book hints at the possibility of a well-financed and concerted effort to establish a theocratic state in the U.S. with the consequent casting aside of rational thought processes. The book considers three aspects centered on the evolution versus creation conflict—the conflict itself, its impact on the teaching of science, and its impact on science literacy and public policy. The 11 papers, each written by different authors, aim to find the ground from which science can be best conveyed to students and to the general public. About half of the authors are physical scientists, the others are from areas such as policy, philosophy, ethics, and law. A wide range of views is presented, which can be summed up as: - Science has all the answers. If you don’t agree, tough—get over it and learn what’s right.
- Science only deals with what’s measurable, so there’s no conflict between science and individual beliefs.
- Science has made a mess of things and we need to return to biblical truth.
With such a wide range of ideas offered, nearly everyone will find parts of the book with which they can agree and surely everyone will also find parts of the book with which they wish to argue. In that way this is a book for everyone because there is value in honing one’s arguments against a well-presented opposing point of view. Perhaps the best approach to this topic is pragmatic: present science in a way that is honest without deliberately attacking the views of others. Four suggestions are proposed for structuring one’s teaching: - Teach science, not scientism.
- Teach for sound understanding, not belief.
- Teach the evidence.
- Allow students to explore their own understanding.
Keep in mind that argument between conflicting views is fundamental to science and that opposing views are not the same as irrational ranting. The concluding chapter is of particular interest because it presents comments made by high school students about their perceptions of science teaching. These open-ended responses were elicited in the guise of an essay contest, and they provide a valuable context in which teachers should consider their craft. The students’ views often are not those we would like them to be, but they are what they are, and we must acknowledge this. Those who have been seriously mulling the science–religion boundary will find no new revelations in this collection of papers, but the book does provide a good base for discussion. Literature Cited- The President’s thoughts were expressed in his inaugural address on January 20, 2009 (accessed Sep 2009).
|
Always in the