Vers Libre | Long-term implications of redefining science

Brenna Gilbert Opinions Editor

You can always count on educators to make the most inane decisions. The Kansas school board has decided that it has the jurisdiction to rethink the basis of science. In an articled entitled, “Philosophers notwithstanding, Kansas school board redefines science” in the 11.15.05 edition of The New York Times, Dennis Overbye describes the change in the state’s official definition of science: “The old definition (of science) reads in part, ‘Science is the human activity of seeking natural explanations for what we observe in the world around us.’ The new one calls science ‘a systematic method of continuing investigation that uses observation, hypothesis testing, measurement, experimentation, logical argument and theory building to lead to more adequate explanations of natural phenomena.’”

Sounds relatively innocuous, one might assert. Yet consider what has been lost: in striking out the words “natural explanation,” we have left room for the possibility of supernatural explanation. This is unacceptable on so many levels.

First of all, supernatural explanation cannot be tested. There is no way to prove it, making it a dangerous “anything goes” scenario. Secondly, rethinking science is just one of those things in life that you don’t get to do. There is, as any scientist will attest, room for change within the boundaries of science. New discoveries may shatter old concepts of how the world works, how our bodies function and how the universe began. Let’s not confuse, however, the ever-shifting realm of science with an actual rethinking of science.

Philosophy is still philosophy, despite the ever-shifting focus and new ground-breaking thoughts. As well, no one had to rethink the way we define and teach religion and theology after philosophers proclaimed that god was dead or had never existed in the first place. Religion often refuses to make room for discovery, scientific or otherwise, that is based on years of trial and error and factual evidence. Why should science need to bow to assertions based on something no one can prove?

It is insufficient to point to the Bible and proclaim that because it is the core of the belief system of millions of people for thousands of years, it should have some authority over science. Millions of people thought the world was flat. The fact that they believed it didn’t make it true, no matter how long the idea had persisted or how many subscribed to it. I do not mean to minimize religion and faith to a misperception of reality, however, I merely want to illustrate that longevity and masses of believers do not a reality make.

Despite indignant and uninformed proclamations of the Christian right that science promotes atheism and naturalism, science in itself is not a faith. When used in a religious context, faith is, according to the Oxford English dictionary, “the spiritual apprehension of divine truths, or of realities beyond the reach of sensible experience or logical proof.” Science is the epitome of the reality of the sensible experience and logical proof. Its goal is not to promote any belief system, rather it strives to promote truth and fact.

If you want to believe in creationism, fine. It is not my place, nor anyone’s for that matter, to tell a person what he or she can and cannot believe. There is a distinct difference, however, between science and religion. Science isn’t something you believe in. You don’t get to say, “No, I don’t believe in gravity.”

The precedent that the school board’s decision sets is frightening when we consider the impact that this will have on schools, not just Kansas K-12, but universities and colleges around the country. Students from Kansas will be asked to compete in a world for which they are simply not equipped. Academia is based on principles of reason and research, and the presence of students in a classroom who have been taught not to value those would be disturbing. Should we no longer encourage pre-med students to pursue a career in cancer research? Kansas’s new definition of science suggests that because scientists haven’t been able to find a cure thus far, perhaps it lies in the supernatural realm. A little less time experimenting and a little more time genuflecting might just get the job done.