Can Science Test Supernatural Worldviews?

Several prominent scientists, philosophers, and scientific institutions have argued that science cannot test supernatural worldviews on the grounds that (1) science presupposes a naturalistic worldview (Naturalism) or that (2) claims involving supernatural phenomena are inherently beyond the scope of scientific investigation. The present paper argues that these assumptions are questionable and that indeed science can test supernatural claims. While scientific evidence may ultimately support a naturalistic worldview, science does not presuppose Naturalism as an a priori commitment, and supernatural claims are amenable to scientific evaluation. This conclusion challenges the rationale behind a recent judicial ruling in the United States concerning the teaching of “Intelligent Design” in public schools as an alternative to evolution and the official statements of two major scientific institutions that exert a substantial influence on science educational policies in the United States. Given that science does have implications concerning the probable truth of supernatural worldviews, claims should not be excluded a priori from science education simply because they might be characterized as supernatural, paranormal, or religious. Rather, claims should be excluded from science education when the evidence does not support them, regardless of whether they are designated as ‘natural’ or ‘supernatural’.     

Idealisation and Galileo’s Pendulum Discoveries: Historical, Philosophical and Pedagogical Considerations

Galileo’s discovery of the properties of pendulum motion depended on his adoption of the novel methodology of idealisation. Galileo’s laws of pendulum motion could not be accepted until the empiricist methodological constraints placed on science by Aristotle, and by common sense, were overturned. As long as scientific claims were judged by how the world was immediately seen to behave, and as long as mathematics and physics were kept separate, then Galileo’s pendulum claims could not be substantiated; the evidence was against them. Proof of the laws required not just a new science, but a new way of doing science, a new way of handling evidence, a new methodology of science. This was Galileo’s method of idealisatioin. It was the foundation of the Galilean–Newtonian Paradigm which characterised the Scientific Revolution of the 17th century, and the subsequent centuries of modern science. As the pendulum was central to Galileo’s and Newton’s physics, appreciating the role of idealisation in their work is an instructive way to learn about the nature of science.     

Wittgenstein,Freud, Dreaming and Education: Psychoanalytic explanation as ‘une façon de parler’

Freud saw the dream as occupying a very important position in his theoretical model. If there were to be problems with his theoretical account of the dream then this would impinge upon proposed therapy and, of course, education as the right balance between the instincts and the institution of culture. Wittgenstein, whilst stating that Freud was interesting and important, raised several issues in relation to psychology/psychoanalysis, and to Freud in particular. Why would Wittgenstein have seen Freud as having some important things to say, even though he was sharply critical of Freud's claims to be scientific? The major issues to be considered in this paper are, in Section 1, the scientific status of Freud's work—was it science or was it more like philosophy than science; the analysis of dreams; rationality, and dreams and madness. Section 2 considers Freud and education, including the indignity of Freud's notion of ‘the talking cure.’ Section 3 considers psychoanalytic explanations not as theory but as a manner of speaking: ‘une façon de parler.’     

Rómulo de Carvalho’s Work on the Popularization of Science During Salazarism

This article provides an account of Rómulo de Carvalho’s most prominent works on the popularization of science during the Salazarist regime in Portugal. Carvalho has been praised for his ‘unique’ writing style, for his uncommon ability to communicate scientific knowledge with clarity to a wide audience: he wrote to teachers, to secondary students, to the layman and even to the rural peasantry. Most of his books and articles on popularization explored the History and Philosophy of Science, and it has been claimed that he influenced many youngsters to pursue scientific careers. Given the repressive political context imposed by Salazarism, it is argued that Carvalho’s work on the popularization of science had a humanist and libertarian connotation. However, intriguingly, different from some of his contemporaries who also promoted humanistic education for all, Carvalho was never targeted by the Dictatorship. The article seeks to shed light on this matter. It points out the educational reach of Carvalho’s writings and suggests that popularization of science in repressive regimes is not necessarily a problematic issue as long as it does not threat the status quo.     

Goethe’s Conception of “Experiment as Mediator” and Implications for Practical Work in School Science

There has been growing criticism over the aims, methods, and contents of practical work in school science, particularly concerning their tendency to oversimplify the scientific practice with focus on the hypothesis-testing function of experiments. In this article, we offer a reading of Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s scientific writings—particularly his works on color as an exquisite articulation of his ideas about experimentation—through the lens of practical school science. While avoiding the hasty conclusions made from isolated experiments and observations, Goethe sought in his experiments the interconnection among diverse natural phenomena and rejected the dualistic epistemology about the relation of humans and nature. Based on a close examination of his color theory and its underlying epistemology, we suggest three potential contributions that Goethe’s conception of scientific experimentation can make to practical work in school science.     

James Hutton’s Geological Tours of Scotland: Romanticism,Literary Strategies,and the Scientific Quest

Rather than focussing on the relationship between science and literature, this article attempts to read scientific writing as literature. It explores a somewhat neglected element of the story of the emergence of geology in the late eighteenth century—James Hutton’s unpublished accounts of the tours of Scotland that he undertook in the years 1785–1788 in search of empirical evidence for his theory of the earth. Attention to Hutton’s use of literary techniques and conventions highlights the ways these texts dramatise the journey of scientific discovery and allow Hutton’s readers to imagine that they were virtual participants in the geological quest, conducted by a savant whose self-fashioning made him a reliable guide through Scotland’s geomorphology and the landscapes of deep time.     

Belief,Knowledge and Understanding

This article discusses how to deal with the relations between different cultural perspectives in classrooms, based on a proposal for considering understanding and knowledge as goals of science education, inspired by Dewey’s naturalistic humanism. It thus combines educational and philosophical interests. In educational terms, our concerns relate to how science teachers position themselves in multicultural classrooms. In philosophical terms, we are interested in discussing the relations between belief, understanding, and knowledge under the light of Dewey’s philosophy. We present a synthesis of Dewey’s theory of inquiry through his naturalistic humanism and discuss its implications for the concepts of belief, understanding, and knowledge, as well as for the goals of science teaching. In particular, we highlight problems arising in the context of possible conflicts between scientific and religious claims in the school environment that result from totalitarian positions. We characterize an individual’s position as totalitarian if he or she takes some way of thinking as the only one capable of expressing the truth about all that exists in the world, lacks open-mindedness to understand different interpretative perspectives, and attempts to impose her or his interpretation about the facts to others by violent means or not. From this stance, any other perspective is taken to be false a priori and, accordingly, as a putative target to be suppressed or adapted to the privileged way of thinking. We argue, instead, for a more fallibilist evaluation of our own beliefs and a more respectful appraisal of the diversity of students’ beliefs by both students and teachers.     

Evidence and Warrants for Belief in a College Astronomy Course

Science educators have argued that it is insufficient to be able to recite thetheories of science and not know how knowledge claims in science are justified, what counts as evidence, or how theory and evidence interact. We wonder, however, how much students' understandings of the nature of science vary with content. This paper draws on data collected in a university astronomy course. Data include three interviews and written work from twenty students, as well as written work from the 340 students in the class. This study provides us with evidence on how students' talk and writing about the nature of science differs depending on the particular scientific topic which is under discussion. The relationship between theory and evidence, warrants for belief, and nature of observation are described in various ways in the different disciplines discussed in the course.     

Darwin’s Other Bulldog: Charles Kingsley and the Popularisation of Evolution in Victorian England

The nineteenth-century Anglican Priest Charles Kingsley (1819?C1875) was a significant populariser of Darwin??s theory of evolution by natural selection. Kingsley was successful in this regard because he developed such diverse connections throughout his career. In the 1840s he associated with Chartists and radical journalists; in the 1850s and 1860s he moved freely in scientific circles and was elected Fellow of the Linnean Society of London in 1856 and Fellow of the Geological Society of London in 1863. In 1859 he was appointed Chaplain in Ordinary to the Queen. In 1860 the Prince Consort was willing and able to secure Kingsley appointment as the Regius Professor of Modern History at Cambridge University and he subsequently became tutor to the Prince of Wales. Thereafter he was frequently invited into high Victorian Society. A friend of ??Darwin??s Bulldog?? Thomas Huxley, of the eminent geologist Charles Lyell and a correspondent of Darwin, at every turn he sought to promote Darwin??s ideas as theologically orthodox, a life-long campaign in which he was eminently successful.     

赫胥黎与达尔文主义及生态伦理学的创新

赫胥黎对生物进化论作出划时代创新。他汲取古希腊赫拉克利特的直观辩证法,使康德宇宙整体发展观推陈出新。从人类发生学和人猿比较解剖学新视角,重新确定了人在生物界中的位置,使达尔文的人猿同祖论,从"假说"深化为科学的结论。他看到人类社会和生物进化的差别,纠正了社会达尔文主义的错误。他把猿与具有"至善伦理"的人和生物进化相统一,赋予人类保护生态系统义不容辞的社会责任。他由此成为生态伦理学说的开拓者。     

The Fact of Evolution: Implications for Science Education

Creationists who object to evolution in the science curriculum of public schoolsoften cite Jonathan Well's book Icons of Evolution in their support (Wells2000). In the third chapter of his book Wells claims that neither paleontologicalnor molecular evidence supports the thesis that the history of life is an evolutionaryprocess of descent from preexisting ancestors. We argue that Wells inappropriatelyrelies upon ambiguities inherent in the term `Darwinian' and the phrase `Darwin'stheory'. Furthermore, he does not accurately distinguish between the overwhelmingevidence that supports the thesis of common descent and controversies that pertainto causal mechanisms such as natural selection. We also argue that Wells' attemptsto undermine the evidence in support of common descent are flawed and hischaracterization of the relevant data is misleading. In particular, his assessment ofthe `Cambrian explosion' does not do justice to the fossil record. Nor do his selectivereferences to debate about molecular and paleontological phylogenies constitute a caseagainst common descent. We conclude that the fossil and molecular evidence is morethan sufficient to warrant science educators to present common descent as a well-established scientific fact. We also argue that diagrams depicting the `tree of life' can be pedagogically useful as simplified representations of the history of life.     

Darwin and Religion: Correcting the Caricatures

Much has been written on the subject of Darwinism and religion, but rather less on the development of Darwin’s own thinking on religious matters and how it changed over time. What were his religious, or anti-religious, beliefs? Did he believe that his theory of evolution by natural selection was incompatible with belief in a Creator? Was it his revolutionary science that turned him into an agnostic? If not, what other considerations affected his judgment? The aim of this paper is to illuminate these questions and, in so doing, to correct some popular caricatures that frequently appear when the two words ‘science’ and ‘religion’ are juxtaposed. Darwin himself reflected deeply on the theological problem of suffering and justified his naturalism on the ground that it made the deity less directly responsible for the more repulsive features of creation. The deism that he espoused at the time of writing his Origin of Species also left its mark in his conviction that it would be demeaning to the deity to suggest that its purposes could not be achieved through natural causes. The diversity of the religious responses also corrects a common misperception that there was almost unanimous hostility from religious interests.     

Subjectivity and the Arts: how could be Hepburn an objectivist

Hepburn argues that all education, and so Arts Education, educates a person's subjectivity, his or her Lebenswelt; though the sciences take the ‘objectifying way’ they too educate our subjectivity. I show why there can be no decision procedures, involving the use of logical operators for interpreting a work of art, but argue that Hepburn's view that music etc. can furnish ‘authoritative imaginative realisations’, nevertheless presupposes a ‘soft’ objectivist position. Whilst Hepburn is right in thinking that the subjective provides the context for objectifying procedures in education (and more generally), it cannot be the case, as he implies, that aesthetic criteria could have a role in the selection of preferred scientific explanations and theories. It is, however, argued that the aesthetic can be generative of objectifying ways, or theoryenabling.     

High school biology evolution learning experiences in a rural context: a case of and for cultural border crossing

Although the concept of “rural” is difficult to define, rural science education provides the possibility for learning centered upon a strong connection to the local community. Rural American adolescents tend to be more religious than their urban counterparts and less accepting of evolution than their non-rural peers. Because the status and perception of evolutionary theory may be very different within the students’ lifeworlds and the subcultures of the science classroom and science itself, a cultural border crossing metaphor can be applied to evolution teaching and learning. This study examines how a teacher may serve as a cultural border crossing tour guide for students at a rural high school as they explore the concept of biological evolution in their high school biology class. Data collection entailed two formal teacher interviews, field note observations of two biology class periods each day for 16 days during the Evolution unit, individual interviews with 14 students, student evolution acceptance surveys, student evolution content tests, and classroom artifacts. The major findings center upon three themes regarding how this teacher and these students had largely positive evolution learning experiences even as some students continued to reject evolution. First, the teacher strategically positioned himself in two ways: using his unique “local” trusted position in the community and school and taking a position in which he did not personally represent science by instead consistently teaching evolution “according to scientists.” Second, his instruction honored local “rural” funds of knowledge with respect to local knowledge of nature and by treating students’ religious knowledge as a form of local expertise about one set of answers to questions also addressed by evolution. Third, the teacher served as a border crossing “tour guide” by helping students identify how the culture of science and the culture of their lifeworlds may differ with respect to evolutionary theory. Students negotiated the cultural borders for learning evolution in several ways, and different types of border crossings are described. The students respected the teacher’s apparent neutrality, sensitivity toward multiple positions, explicit attention to religion/evolution, and transparency of purposes for teaching evolution. These findings add to the current literature on rural science education by highlighting local funds of knowledge for evolution learning and how rural teachers may help students navigate seemingly hazardous scientific topics. The study’s findings also add to the current evolution education literature by examining how students’ religious perspectives may be respected as a form of expertise about questions of origins by allowing students to examine similarities and differences between scientific and religious approaches to questions of biological origins and change.     

达尔文：诞辰两百周年纪念

英国自然学家查尔斯·罗伯特·达尔文FRS（1809年2月12日-1882年4月19日）发现并公布了令人信服的证据,证明所有的生命物种都是由共同的祖先长期进化而来的,这个过程被他称为“自然选择”。进化论在达尔文生前就被科学界大多数领域以及许多普通大众所接受,     

Teaching Darwinian Evolution: Learning from Religious Education

This article examines what science education might be able to learn from phenomenological religious education’s attempts to teach classes where students hold a plurality of religious beliefs. Recent statements as to how best to accomplish the central pedagogical concept of ‘learning from religion’ as a vehicle for human transformation are explored, and then used to appraise the historical research into how Charles Darwin’s responses to religious ideas influenced and were influenced by his scientific work. The issues identified as crucial for science educators to be aware of when teaching students Darwinian evolution are then outlined and, finally, suggestions are made to enable individual students to examine how their personal religious beliefs might interact with their growing understanding of Darwin’s evolutionary approach.     

Explaining as Mediated Action

Explaining is one of the most important everyday practices in science education. In this article, we examine how scientific explanations could serve as cultural tools for members of a group of pre-service physics teachers. Specifically, we aim at their use of explanations about forces of inertia in non-inertial frames of reference. A basic assumption of our study is that explanatory tools (e.g., typical explanations learned) shape the ways we think and speak about the world. Drawing on the theory of mediated action, analysis illustrates three major claims on scientific explanations: (1) explaining is an act of actively responding to explanations presented by others (and not only to evidence itself); (2) the actual experience of explaining involves the enactment of power and authority; (3) resistance (not acknowledging an explanation as one’s own) might be a constitutive part of learning how to explain (hence, teachers could approach scientific explanation in a less dogmatic way). These assertions expand the possibilities of dialogue between studies of scientific explanations and the social sciences. Implications for science teaching and research in science education are presented.     

Habermas, Carr and the Possibility of a Science of Education

A recent attempt to answer questions on the scientific status of education draws on the thoughts of Jürgen Habermas. There is a tension in Habermas's work because he consigns scientific endeavour to the realm of instrumental action, while attempting to base his theory of communication on scientific results. This suggests that either his theory is wrong and science is not merely instrumental, or that his recent proposals mistake manipulation for understanding. This proposition is considered by examining the work of Wilfred Carr, who has taken up the ideas of Habermas. Carr interprets and develops Habermas's theory within an analytical framework, situating it in relation to recent developments in the philosophy of education and philosophy more generally, bringing new light on the relationship between critical theory and education, and overcoming certain limitations of previous scientific characterisations. However, it is argued here that Habermas's idea of science is too abstract to provide a sufficiently complex grounding for substantive, socially liberating, educational practise.     

Einstein as a Missionary of Science

The paper reviews Einstein’s engagement as a mediator and popularizer of science. It discusses the formative role of popular scientific literature for the young Einstein, showing that not only his broad scientific outlook but also his internationalist political views were shaped by these readings. Then, on the basis of recent detailed studies, Einstein’s travels and their impact on the dissemination of relativity theory are examined. These activities as well as Einstein’s own popular writings are interpreted in the context of his understanding of science as part of human culture.     

Bhabha’s contributions to elementary particle physics and cosmic rays research

Bhabha’s scientific research contributions are descibed in the context of his life and contemporary science. During the Cambridge period (1927–1939), he worked in positron theory (Bhabha scattering), cosmic rays (Bhabha-Heitler theory of cosmic ray showers, prediction of heavier electrons) and meson theory. In Bangalore during 1939–1945, he worked on classical relativistic spinning particles (Bhabha-Corben equations), meson theory and initiated experimental work in cosmic rays in India. He then founded Tata Institute of Fundamental Research in 1945 at Bombay and moved there. Here he started work on relativistic wave equations (Bhabha equations.). He also initiated India’s nuclear energy programme in 1948 and this was his main preoccupation later.