McLean vs Arkansas Essay -- Creationism Creation Science

Science is a word that carries with it many meanings - knowledge, truth, a process of examination. But when it comes to setting a clear definition of the term, difficulties arise. Certainly physics is science, and theology isn't. But many disciplines are less intuitively dichotomized, such as the fields of psychology, history, ethics, and many others. Are these sciences? And while it may at first seem like a rather irrelevant issue only for lexicographers and philosophers, in fact the distinction between what is science and what is not is of great importance to society - for in the formation of the public school curriculum, the distinction between science, which must be taught, and religion, which must not be, is essential to keeping education both factual, up-to-date, and constitutional. The 1982 court case McLean vs. Arkansas put in the public spotlight just how important drawing the distinction is. In what has become a landmark case in the creation/evolution legal debate, the Arkansas legislature passed without debate a bill mandating that the state redraw its science education standards so to include in the state's public high school curricula the body of ideas known as "creationism" - the notion that Earth and its inhabitant life forms were formed in the same forms as they are seen today - alongside evolution - the mainstream view of biologists holding that life developed and diversified gradually over millions of successive generations. The concept of creationism has a strong religious history and very deep religious overtones, and the constitutionality of teaching the subject in a public school immediately was questioned. Called to preside over the resulting legal case was U.S. District Judge William Overton. Thu... ...of testability is unclear and the incorporation of unobserved elements is not unique to creationism, so this in and of itself is not a reason to exclude it from a curriculum - and as previously mentioned Darwin considered the two models of creation and evolution on equal scientific grounds in his arguments. Instead, creationism fails on account of the evidence against it. So in the end, while Overton's attempt to determine essential characteristics of science does not stand up to philosophical scrutiny, his decision was correct: creationism is not part of modern science, and does not belong in the modern classroom. Works Cited Gould, Stephen Jay. The Mismeasure of Man. W. W. Norton and Co.: New York, 1996. Kleppner, Daniel and Robert Kolenkow. An Introduction to Mechanics. McGraw-Hill, Inc: Boston, 1973. McLean v. Arkansas, US District Court. 1982.