Re: The Master Plan?


"catshark" <catshark@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:7jeaj1l09ebsugb208802a5fbn84e4srht@xxxxxxxxxx
>
> . . . or a fallback position at least.
>
> One interesting thing is included in the most recent Discovery Institute
> statement about the Dover school case that I haven't seen anyone comment
> on.
>
> While I am not sanguine about the prospects of American courts continuing
> to keep ID out of public education as the makeup of the Supreme Court
> changes, apparently the DI is not sure about that either. Consider this
> from the statement:
>
> While Discovery Institute does not support efforts to require
> the teaching of intelligent design in public schools, it also
> strongly opposes the ACLU's attempt to censor classroom
> discussion of intelligent design. ...
>
> [T]he ACLU is betraying the principle of academic freedom
> by seeking a government-imposed gag-order on teachers and
> students that would prevent even voluntary discussions of
> intelligent design in the science classroom. ...
>
> <http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2847&program=News&callingPage=discoMainPage>
>
> Clearly, what the Discovery Institute wants (or, at least, recognizes as
> the best it can hope for at the present time) is "voluntary" discussion of
> ID in public classrooms. This is probably intended to support an argument
> that, if the discussion is not initiated by teachers or school officials,
> it isn't government action and, therefore, not a violation of the
> Establishment clause. I'll pass over the validity of that argument for
> what
> I find more interesting.
>
> If not the teachers (who, according to the DI, "do not know enough about
> intelligent design or have sufficient curriculum materials to teach about
> it", in any case), then who will initiate and carry on these voluntary
> discussions? Who else but the students themselves?
>
> Thus, the present master plan, the successor to the heady promise of the
> Wedge Document, the fruit of all the labor of the Johnson, Dembski, Behe,
> et al., comes down to whether or not they can chivvy 13 year olds into
> making their case for them. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

I think that's part of it, but it's not the totality. If you look at the
bottom of the statement from Dr West he confirms that he wants students
_and_ teachers to study evolution and ID. I think the plan is slightly more
insidious therefore. If they (DI) can persuade both parties to become
complicit in discussions about ID within the classroom then they can
generate ongoing interest in their concepts without:

a) being directly responsible for any controversy or subsequent court
actions that may arise from aggrieved parents or other teachers ('well we
did say don't _teach_ ID ... just _talk_ about it')
b) gain a wider, uncritical, support for ID amongst interested parties

As DI are vague (at best) about what exactly ID is as a theory (if it is a
theory why are they so reticent about fighting it out in court or drawing up
a lesson plan?) then its adoption by individuals will be by those who are
persuaded by the underlying religious implications rather than any
scientific arguments. This means that any voluntary discussions about ID
within the classroom will be made by those who aren't that interested in
challenging it as a concept (as it reinforces their theistic pretensions).

It still looks like DI are going for wider cultural and social change and
their distancing themselves from the Dover situation seems to be evidence of
that. As long as they refuse to be drawn on these issues they'll remain
fairly constant in the background trying to influence change without forcing
a confrontation. They are, in short, playing the long game.

The Dover situation, and others, are still working in DI's favour. The
amount of interest that has been generated over ID is something of a PR
guru's dream - especially as the 'authorities' on ID sat in castle DI are
unscathed and can pretend it has nothing to do with them or the 'theory' of
ID.

While this court case is important I can't see it doing any long term damage
to DI's agenda.

>
> --
> ---------------
> J. Pieret
> ---------------
>
> The political motivation behind the Wedge Strategy:
>
> "Religion is the opiate of the masses . . .
> and that is a _good_ thing."
>
> -- Bobby Bryant --
>


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Boys as academic underachievers
    ... >> think this early preparation for the concept of going from one classroom ... >> different teachers is a VERY GOOD thing. ... >> who come from our school seem to get right into the swing of the middle ... >> school day compared to many of the other kids. ...
    (misc.kids)
  • Re: He, he, he, he, he, he, he, you cant beat success. he, he, he
    ... i got plenty of ex teachers now teaching in the us. ... TACLOBAN CITY-One public school in this city really needs help-and ... Four teachers, including Lim, and a guard are assigned to the school. ... classroom has electricity, ...
    (soc.culture.filipino)
  • Re: Reading on paper vs "screening" online and "screening" on a Kindle Screener
    ... and the load some of these kids come to school with ... The number of books they carry is a measure of how poorly the classroom day is arranged. ... I know teachers would have to do a lot of adjusting, and some things would need to be changed in the rooms, but moving the teachers would be vastly more efficient. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: teaching algebra to elementary school students
    ... Not ALL parents, but a solid core of parents. ... When visiting the school, I'd want to see that children in the classroom ... I'd be looking at the ways in which teachers maintain classroom ...
    (misc.kids)
  • Re: Why forced singing of national anthem does not work
    ... Tokyo teachers win anthem fight ... 'Kimigayo' directive violates freedom of thought, court rules ... (Registration necessary to retrieve full article from the Japan Times ... the nation exists not for the people themselves, ...
    (sci.lang.japan)
Loading