Viagra online Cialis online Actos online

False Pearls

Teaching Evolutionary Biology is hard. It is not easy, like teaching astrophysics would be. Nobody knows anything about astrophysics, so all the instructor has to do is to find the empty space in the student’s brain and put some astrophysics in there.

The problem with Evolutionary Biology is that everybody already knows lots of stuff about it. Everybody already knows all about animal behavior because they have a cat. Everybody already knows all about human behavior because they are a human. Everybody already knows all about mating systems because they have a mate. And so on.

On top of this, we have the venerable science press. Evolutionary biology, especially the part about human evolution, is very cool. Therefore, new findings by evolutionary biologists always get press. Even old findings get press on a slow news day. But reporters are not really reporting the science. They are writing for an audience; an audience that they have created over time with their particular way of reporting.

A very clear example of this is the concept of a Missing Link. There are no missing links in science. Evolutionary biologists reject the concept of a missing link. We don’t use that word. We think it is incorrect and misleading. Yet, it is as difficult to find a news story about a fossil that does NOT use the phrase “Missing Link” as it is to swing a dead cat and not get in trouble with the SPCA. (Not that I’ve actually tried that…)

By the way, reporters know all about this missing link problem. Or at least, science reporters know about it. They always apologize just before they write the story about the missing link.

The things that people know already often need to be removed from the brain prior to teaching new stuff. This may seem a little offensive to some, but really, it is easier to just admit it. I’m not saying that everything I might tell you about evolutionary biology is necessarily true and correct, but in most cases it will be more on the mark than the stuff we learn in Kindergarten or the stuff we learn by simply absorbing the information in which we are steeped, daily.

Anyway, personal experience and the nature of the media conspire to prepare students to fully misunderstand even the most basic concepts in evolutionary biology.

These things … the things taking up valuable brain space but that deserve no place in your grey matter … I call The Falsehoods. I have a long list of them, which apply mainly to college Freshman. My wife Amanda, a High School Biology teacher, has a list too, that applies to high school students. (How romantic was that, when we each learned that the other had a Falsehood list!!! I’ll never forget that day… Oh, but I digress..)

My list is long, but the key elements can be summarized quickly, as follows:


    Falsehoods about Evolution:

  1. Evolution is goal directed and progressive
  2. Species can be organized on a scale of primitive or simple to advanced and complex
  3. Natural selection is all about “survival of the fittest”
  4. Things that are natural are generally good, while things that are unnatural are generally bad
  5. Evolution is “only a theory”
    Falsehoods about how nature works:

  1. Nature maintains a balance
  2. Individuals often act for the survival of their species
    Falsehoods specifically about human evolution:

  1. Humans evolved form apes
  2. Evolution has stopped for humans
  3. (To this I’ll add this sub-falsehood: Serious scientists often entertain the question: “Has evolution stopped for humans?”)
    Falsehoods about behavior:

  1. Genes code for behaviors
  2. The earlier in the life cycle, the more genetically controlled the individual (the phenotype)
  3. Culture overrides or compensates for biology
  4. Culture is quick and adaptive, but biology is ponderous
  5. An adopted baby is not the biological offspring of her mother
    What I call “Us vs. The Other” falsehoods:

  1. Primitive cultures are in balance with nature, while complex civilizations are not
  2. Primitive cultures are primitive, while complex civilizations are complex
  3. You have to be smarter to live in an industrialized society
  4. Civilization will not collapse
    The Common Nonsense Falsehoods:

  1. You can get a free lunch
  2. Rich people have fewer babies than poor people

Remember, these are FALSEhoods. I once had a student who studied this list thinking they were all TRUEhoods. He got a perfect score on the midterm exam. Unfortunately, it was not a perfectly GOOD score…

The following posts are a continuation of this discussion:

Falsehoods Revisited #1
Is it true that Human Beings are no longer subject to Natural Selection?
What is the future of human evolution?
Falsehood: Poor people have more babies

If you like it, share it! These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Netvouz
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati

12 Responses to “False Pearls”  

  1. 1 darrell

    While I’m not sure that teaching evolutionary bio is necessarily harder than teaching anything else, I think that you’ve made a great point about people having the greatest number of insane preconceived notions when they walk into a bio classroom. Bio is probably seconded only by psychology in that department. (The, because I have a brain I know how one works attitude) However, I teach English as a foreign language, and while none of my kids come in with any incorrect English that I have to “replace,” sometimes just getting them excited about the subject at all can be extremely vexing.

    ps- I really like your list of falsehoods.

  2. 2 Greg Laden

    Physicists have been known to get mad at me.

  3. 3 Darmok

    I wonder if you’d consider writing posts explaining some of these falsehoods. I like to consider myself a well-educated layperson, but I have to admit a couple of these have thrown me.

  4. 4 Greg

    Darmok: Done! I plan to wrote about most or all of them over the next few weeks, and I’ve started taht today.

  5. 5 Darmok

    Excellent! I’ll look forward to reading them.

  6. 6 yiela

    I’ll be checking for the articles too. The one that got me was the adopted baby. I am assuming that a mother can only be said to adopt a baby that isn’t already her own (genetic/biological) baby? Seems like a definition thing? The others sounded pretty good to me.

  7. 7 abeja

    Right now, on the side of this page, under the heading “Top Digg
    science news”, there’s a link to a scientific american article called
    “15 Answers to Creationist Evolutionary Rebuttals”. It’s a pretty good
    article for people to get a few answers. The link on Digg didn’t work for me,
    but I found the article here: http://skeptically.org/spiritualism/id5.html

  8. 8 Marta

    “Isn’t migration when dinosaurs turned into humans?”

    This was said by a middle schooler during a class trip to the Science Museum.

    If that wasn’t disturbing enough, the teacher responded with,

    “No, that’s evolution.”

  9. 9 Jenny Zick

    “An adopted baby is not the biological offspring of her mother”

    I’m curious about this one and am interested in hearing the reasoning for this. Keep on posting! thanks

  10. 10 Greg

    Jenny,

    I will presumably get to this issue later on … but briefly:

    If a woman adopts a newborn infant, spends years providing nourishment, protection from the elements, predators, infanticidal males, etc., provides the learning environment for the growing child so that it becomes able to eventually feed itself, shelter itself, find a mate, etc., than how is that woman NOT the biological mother of that child? Biology does not stop when a gene is expressed.

    Of course, the eventual logical extension of this environment is that things like sociology, economics, even cultural anthropology are mere subfields of Biological Anthropology. (One of the many reasons that most cultural anthropologists who get to know me dislike me … even though everybody else who gets to know me things I’m great…)

  1. 1 Falsehoods Revisited #1 at Greg Laden
  2. 2 What is the Future of Human Evolution? at Greg Laden

Leave a Reply