Eric Pseja, Good Schools, Darwin and Evolution

SELECTED
CONTENTS:

"...every group that wishes to see conflicting interests resolved reasonably, or is wise about the conditions under which it enjoys its own freedom, must be profoundly concerned with the state of freedom of speech and assembly, freedom of inquiry and teaching, freedom of press and other forms of communication, freedom of cultural opportunity and development. For in large measure intelligent moral choice depends upon them."
--Sidney Hook (1902-1988), disciple of John Dewey, and champion of pragmatism and democracy

Eric suggests I change the name of Goodschools

Eric's letter arrived at Goodschools quite some time ago. From the day I first read it I have wanted to respond. ...Sorry, Eric, that I took so long.

It is a relatively short letter, so I include its entire text at the start.

Eric Writes:

Hello Mike,

I have just spent the past half-hour perusing discussions published throughout your site. Regardless of the compelling arguments in support of as well as against Darwin's scientific ideas, the fact that you champion the removal of the teaching of Darwin's theories in public schools* raises the question of whether or not you've chosen an appropriate domain name for your website.

In my past experience, I've found that a "good" school is one that teaches about all viable theories and then after discussion (and mention of which viewpoint is generally the most well accepted, if any), allows the students to develop their own thought processes and conclusions. Suppression of information, no matter how unsavory and politically or religiously charged, can never lead to the development of true and full understanding of any issue.

Sincerely,

Eric Pseja

*(Support for this notion is clearly visible in your rebuttal to the letter from "Science Teacher")

Goodschools’ Response: My first observation is that Eric is more articulate than most who write to Goodschools. My second observation is that Eric is civil. My third observation is that Eric asks a good question (I am afraid that were every writer to Goodschools as well organized and articulate as Eric, my job would be a lot less fun). Nevertheless, I will address Eric's question/challenge; which in short would be this: "Why does Goodschools advocate the 'suppression of information,' i.e., the teaching of Darwin's theories in public schools?" My answer, like Eric's letter, will be short.

Darwin's theories, as developed in his "The Descent of Man," do not represent good science, even for his day. Darwin was a disgruntled theological student running away from his "calling." While he did exhibit a reasonably good acumen for observation, his methods were flawed. One has only to read my review of Descent to understand that; or if one does not like to read more than two or three pages at a sitting, my recent response to Becky might provide a shorter summary of Darwin's inadequacies. .

Regarding Eric's assertion that Goodschools wishes to suppress information, I would say this:

The only "suppression" that is currently going on regarding Darwin is the suppression of information perpetrated on our children by the public schools. Darwin's works represent the worst humanity could offer, yet he is regarded as an esteemed scientist in current textbooks.

I am not a writer of textbooks, but if I were, I might include something like this under Darwin's name:

Charles Robert Darwin was born on February 12, 1809 in Shrewsbury, England. He was the fifth child and second son of Robert Waring Darwin and Susannah Wedgwood. Darwin was the British naturalist who became famous for his theories of evolution and natural selection. Like several scientists before him, Darwin believed all the life on earth evolved (developed gradually) over millions of years from a few common ancestors. From 1831 to 1836 Darwin served as naturalist aboard the H.M.S. Beagle on a British science expedition around the world. In South America Darwin found fossils of extinct animals that were similar to modern species. On the Galapagos Islands in the Pacific Ocean he noticed many variations among plants and animals of the same general type as those in South America. The expedition visited places around the world, and Darwin studied plants and animals everywhere he went, collecting specimens for further study. (This was quoted verbatim (but eliminating links) from the first part of the brief biography of Charles Darwin published on the following web site: http://www2.lucidcafe.com/lucidcafe/library/96feb/darwin.html).

Unfortunately Darwin exhibited a strong pre-disposition against dark-skinned people, whom he referred to as "savages." To Darwin, the term “savage” represented an animal, not a real human being--an animal which had a brain smaller than the “civilized” man [read: "white man"]; was less athletic; was weaker; was dumber; cheated more; was not noble; was prone to alcoholism; was not capable of being a genius; smelled badly; represented a different sub-species than “civilized” man, if not a totally different species altogether; had much in common with idiots; and had smaller “brain cases” than did “civilized man.” …And, of course, Darwin’s favorite “savage” whipping boys were those whom he called “Negroes.”

Darwin should not be regarded as a scientist. His methodology was flawed to its core. He was an egregious racist. Rather than the forerunner of modern biology, he was more the forerunner of Hitler's Nazi Germany and modern racism.

Those who wish to know more about Darwin should read my review of Darwin's Descent.

Were this to be done, public schools might not be totally "good," but they certainly would be "better."

Would you like to see related letters and my comments?

--Mike Carrier (MA, NYU--Graduate School of Arts and Science)

This site features a frank presentation of issues facing parents, taxpayers and schools in reforming schools in the twenty-first century. Good Schools promotes good schools, and explains what is necessary to achieve good schools. We are convinced that good schools can be obtained only with sound curriculum, which does not include the teaching of Darwin's theory of origin, or Darwin's theory of evolution. We believe that local school boards need to be empowered, and the influence of teachers' unions ought to be limited to labor-related issues. Teachers' unions should have no say in curriculum.

We are convinced that the teachings of Darwin, particularly Darwin's teachings on evolution, and Darwin's theories on origins, ought not be taught as fact. Darwin and Darwin's theories are not generally accepted by contemporary physicists and cosmologists, and, therefore, Darwin and Darwin's theories ought not be accepted whole-cloth by our schools of education, and ought not be presented as fact in public schools.

Because Richard Dawkins has set himself up as the number one defender of Darwin and Darwin's theory of evolution, we will go to some length explaining Dawkins' Darwin defenses, and we will do our best to explode Dawkins' Darwin defenses.

We seek to show from Darwin's own hand that Darwin, and Darwin's theory of evolution, are racist at the core. Darwin was a racist, Darwin's theory of evolution is racist, and Darwin's theory of origins is racist.

We further seek to show that Darwin's theory of evolution is not scientific. We show that racism, more than science, was behind Darwin and Darwin's theory of evolution, and Darwin's theory of origins.

Some of the terms commonly used on this site are: Darwin, Dawkins, schools, public schools, education, gun control, teachers, John Dewey, Littleton, racist, racism , school choice, African American, Sidney Hook, evolution, and Mike Carrier.

Bottom line--good schools require work. Good schools do not just happen. We need good schools, if we are to have a good nation.