If essentialism is a default style of thinking , as much research suggests, then that puts evolution at a major disadvantage. Charles Darwin and his many scientific disciples have shown that essentialism is just plain wrong: Given enough time, biological kinds are not fixed but actually change. Species are connected through intermediate types to other species—and all are ultimately related to one another.
Teleological Thinking. Essentialism is just one basic cognitive trait, observed in young children, that seems to hinder evolutionary thinking. Why do children think like this? Overactive Agency Detection. That too may be the result of a default brain setting. Another trait, closely related to teleological thinking, is our tendency to treat any number of inanimate objects as if they have minds and intentions. There has been much speculation about the evolutionary origin of our anthropomorphizing tendency.
These results suggest that some Americans who do accept that humans have evolved are reluctant to say so in the two-question approach, perhaps because they are uncomfortable placing themselves on the secular side of a cultural divide.
The effect of the different question formats is especially pronounced among two of the most religious subsets of U. Christians: white evangelical Protestants and black Protestants. Similarly, 59 percent of black Protestants who were asked about this topic in the two-question format say humans have always existed in their present form. These findings are in keeping with arguments by sociologists of religion that highly religious Americans may feel conflicted about saying humans have evolved, unless they are able to clarify that they also believe God had a hand in the development of life.
Indeed, the subset of people who respond differently to the two survey approaches consists mainly of those who believe that God or a higher power played a role in human evolution. For example, nearly all white evangelical Protestants who say humans have evolved—whether in a branched-choice or single-question format—also say God had a role in human evolution.
There are smaller differences among Catholics in response to the two different question formats, and white mainline Protestants express roughly the same views about evolution regardless of the approach used. Overwhelming majorities of the religiously unaffiliated those who describe their religion as atheist, agnostic or nothing in particular say humans have evolved over time on both the two-question 87 percent and the single-question format 88 percent. Prior to this recent experiment, the center tested various versions of a two-step approach to asking about evolution.
In one line of testing, we varied the survey context that is, the questions that immediately precede the evolution questions but found no differences in survey responses. Considered together, the experiments illustrate the importance of testing multiple ways of asking about evolution. For some people, views about the origins and development of human life are bound up with deeply held religious beliefs. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence.
Pence is an accomplished politician, and knows exactly how to appeal to his intended audience. He is also an accomplished trial lawyer, which makes him a conjuror with words, and like any skilful conjuror he has pulled off his trick by distraction. Pence has drawn us into a discussion about words, when our focus should be on the evidence. I would suggest the opposite approach. Students will have learned its meaning in the same way they learn meanings in general: by seeing how the word is used.
They will have heard of atomic theory, which no one has seriously doubted for over a century. And what about the theory of gravity? The correct response is to say that evolution is a theory — like gravity is a theory — and then redirect attention to the evidence. Repts Nat Ctr Sci Educ. Dennett DC. Breaking the spell: religion as a natural phenomenon. New York: Viking; Denton M. Evolution: a theory in crisis. New developments in science are challenging orthodox Darwinism.
Diamond J, editor. Virus and the whale: exploring evolution in creatures small and large. Arlington: NSTA; Accessed 18 Feb Dobzhansky T. Nothing in biology makes sense except in light of evolution. Am Biol Teach ;— Evolution and religion: attitudes of Scottish first year biology and medical students to the teaching of evolutionary biology. Biosci Educ E-Journal. Duschl R, Grandy RE.
Demarcation in science education. Toward an enhanced view of scientific method. Epistemology and science education. Understanding the evolution vs. New York: Routledge; Edis T. An illusion of harmony: science and religion in Islam.
Amherst: Prometheus Books; Ellis J. How science works: evolution. Dordrecht: Springer; Evans EM. The emergence of beliefs about the origins of species in school-age children.
Merrill-Palmer Q. Beyond scopes: why creationism is here to stay. Imagining the impossible: the development of magical, scientific, and religious thinking in contemporary society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; b. Cognitive and contextual factors in the emergence of diverse belief systems: creation versus evolution. Cogn Psychol. Conceptual change and evolutionary biology: a developmental analysis. In: Vosniadou S, editor. International handbook of research on conceptual change.
The 95 percent solution. School is not where most Americans learn most of their science. Am Sci. Farber P. Teaching evolution and the nature of science. Farley J. Intern J Sci Educ. Fine C. A mind of its own: how your brain distorts and deceives. Fingarette H. Forrest B, Gross PR. The wedge of intelligent design. Oxford: Oxford University Press; Freeman S, Herron JC. Evolutionary analysis.
Boston: Pearson Benjamin Cummings; Futuyma DJ. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates; Gauch HG. Scientific method in practice. Gibson MT. Culture wars in state education policy: a look at the relative treatment of evolutionary theory in state science standards. Soc Sci Q. Gish DT. Evolution: the fossils still say NO! El Cajon: Institute for Creation Research; Golinski J. Making natural knowledge.
Constructivism and the history of science. The role of teleological thinking in learning the Darwinian model of evolution. Wishful thinking and source monitoring. Mem Cog. Gould SJ. Nat Hist. New York: Norton; pp. Grantham TA. Hierarchical approaches to macroevolution: recent work on species selection and the effect hypothesis.
Ann Rev Ecol Syst. Hierarchies in evolution. Palaeobiology II. Oxford: Blackwell Science; Greene ED. Gregory TR. Understanding evolutionary trees. Understanding natural selection: essential concepts and common misconceptions. Griffiths M. The cognitive psychology of gambling. J Gamb Stud. Haack S. Defending science — within reason. Between scientism and cynicism. Paperback edition. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books; ; p. Hacking I. The emergence of probability. Harmon-Jones E, Mills J, editors.
Cognitive dissonance. Progress on a pivotal theory in social psychology. Harrison P. In: Harrision P, editor. The Cambridge companion to science and religion. Harvey N. Wishful thinking impairs belief-desire reasoning: a case of decoupling failure in adults? Hazen RM, Trefil J. Science matters: achieving scientific literacy. New York: Anchor Books; Evolutionary principles and their practical application.
Evol Appl. The fact of evolution: implications for science education. Hofstadter R. Anti-intellectualism in American life. New York: Knopf; Hokayem H, BouJaoude S. Holland JH. Emergence: from chaos to order. Reading: Helix Books; Hull DL. Defining Darwinism. Isaacowitz DM. The gaze of the optimist.
Personal Soc Psych Bull. Isaak M. The counter-creationism handbook. Westport: Greenwood; Jakobi SR. Unrealistic optimism in early-phase oncology trials. Ethics Hum Res. Teaching evolution using historical arguments in a conceptual change strategy.
Johnson PE. Darwin on trial. Washington, DC: Regnery Gateway; Reason in the balance. The case against naturalism in science, law and education.
Downers Grove: InterVarsity; Jungwirth E. The problem of teleology in biology as a problem of biology-teacher education. Cultural cognition of scientific consensus. Jour Risk Res. Charles Darwin and evolution: illustrating human aspects of science. Kampourakis K, Zogza V. Kelemen D. Why are rocks pointy? Dev Psychol. Beliefs about purpose: on the origins of teleological thought. The descent of mind: psychological perspectives on hominid evolution. New York: Oxford University Press; b.
Trends Cogn Sci. Teleological minds: how natural intuitions about agency and purpose influence learning about evolution. Evolution challenges: integrating research and practice in teaching and learning about evolution.
Oxford: Oxford University Press; ; in press. Kida T. The six basic mistakes we make in thinking. Krizan Z, Windschitl PD. Wishful thinking about the future: does desire impact optimism? Soc Pers Psychol Compass. Kugler C. Lachman SP.
One nation under God: religion in contemporary American society. New York: Harmony Books; Largent MA. Lawson AE. Predicting science achievement: the role of developmental level, disembedding ability, mental capacity, prior knowledge and beliefs. A review of research on formal reasoning and science teaching. Formal reasoning ability and misconceptions concerning genetics and natural selection. Lawson AE, Weser J.
The rejection of nonscientific beliefs about life: effects of instruction and reasoning skills. Learning about evolution and rejecting a belief in special creation: effects of relative reasoning skill, prior knowledge, prior belief and religious commitment. Lazar A. Deceiving oneself or self-deceived? Lederman NG. Nature of science: past, present, and future. Handbook of research on science education. Mahwah: Erlbaum; Lennox JG.
Darwin was a teleologist. Biol Philos. Liang C, Dunn P. In: Are entrepreneurs optimistic, realistic, both or fuzzy? Relationship between entrepreneurial traits and entrepreneurial learning. Acad Entrep J. Accessed 19 Jul Lipps J.
The decline of reason? Learning from the fossil record. The Paleontological Society papers, vol. Lawrence: The Paleontological Society; Livingstone D. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; The intelligent design controversy: lessons from psychology and education. The importance of understanding the nature of science for accepting evolution. Lord T, Marino S. How university students view the theory of evolution. Jour Col Sci Teach. Lovallo D, Kahneman D. Harv Bus Rev.
Teaching evolution: challenging religious preconceptions. Integr Comp Bio. Martin JW. Compatibility of major U. Christian denominations with evolution. Mayr E. The growth of biological thought: diversity, evolution, and inheritance. What is Darwinism today? Cause and effect in biology. In: Mayr E, editor. Toward a new philosophy of biology.
Mazur A. Believers and disbelievers in evolution. Pol Life Sci. McComas WF. Science and its myths. The skeptic encyclopedia of pseudoscience. The nature of science in science education: an introduction. McDonald CV. Creationist vs. Evolution education: seeing the forest for the trees and focusing our efforts on the teaching of evolution.
Problem concepts in evolution part I: purpose and design. Problem concepts in evolution part II: cause and chance. Meadows L. The missing link. An inquiry approach for teaching all students about evolution.
0コメント