No Subject

[Douglas <dougwils@moscow.com>]

Dear visionaries,

In response to Daniel's question about earthquakes and zoning laws -- his
illustration is a good example of my point. I do not hold to the view
that the different "races" are in fact different evolutionary
races. I also accept the fact that contemporary evolutionists do
not hold to this either. My question is: if evolution has not stopped,
then the evolution of the "next" human race would evolve out of
one of current branches. And that macro step would be preceded by micro
steps. If you accept the idea of evolutionary "progress" at all
(which is in itself a contradiction), then does this not give a
biological imprimatur to racism in principle? One group is now proving
itself "fitter" than the others.

This ties in with the issue of "truth claims." Evolution is
disputed by lots of people -- as Malcolm Muggeridge put it, in retrospect
evolution will be seen as one of the great jokes of history. But this is
neither here nor there. The fact is that it is disputed. When you are
deciding what to teach (or not) in the government schools, do you go with
the sociological fact that it is significantly disputed and teach all
sides? Or do you decide that some "truth claims" are either
false or irrelevant, and dismiss them on the basis of a worldview? If so,
what is the name of that worldview, and why are the adherents of another
one out of court? By what standard do you evaluate the curriculum
of the schools?