"The whole idea behind acceptance of evolution has been the assumption that if people understood it, if they really knew it, they would see the logic and accept it," study co-author David Haury, an associate professor of education at Ohio State University, said in a statement.
But, he noted, research on the matter has been inconsistent. While one study would find a strong relationship between knowledge level and acceptance, another would not. Likewise, studies have contradicted each other on the relationship between religious identity and acceptance of evolution, he said…
In a new study:
124 pre-service biology teachers at different stages in a standard teacher preparation program…[where asked a] series of questions to measure their overall acceptance of evolution…they tested the students on their knowledge of evolutionary science…For each question, the students wrote down how certain they felt about the correctness of their answers — an indicator of their gut feelings.
They found that intuition had a significant impact on what the students accepted, no matter how much they knew and regardless of their religious beliefs. Even students with a greater knowledge of evolutionary facts weren't more likely to accept the theory unless they also had a strong gut feeling about the facts, the results showed.
The study has important implications for the teaching of evolution, the researchers said. Informing students about this conflict between intuition and logic may help them judge ideas on their merits.
David Haury notes:
Educationally, we think that's a place to start. It's a concrete way to show
them, “Look, you can be fooled and make a bad decision, because you just can't
deny your gut."
Indeed, and the manner whereby you can be fooled and make a bad decision goes each and every way. For example, from pre-school children’s books to college textbooks we find texts that are supposed to be about science or biology which are peppered with unscientific Darwinian worldview-philosophical narrative passed off as science. Students can go from Pre-K to earning a degree without ever questioning or otherwise discerning observational, empirical facts from worldview-philosophy based Victorian Era story telling.
Moreover, how many people have no particular interest in biology, evolution or Darwinism and thus, never revisit the topics again. How many mere end up un-skeptically holding to that which they were propagandized into believing?
The reference study was published in the January 2012 issue of Journal of Research in Science Teaching (Vol. 49, No. 1, by Minsu Ha, David L. Haury, and Ross H. Nehm) under the title Feeling of Certainty: Uncovering a Missing Link Between Knowledge and Acceptance of Evolution.
The abstract notes:
We propose a new model of the factors influencing acceptance of evolutionary theory that highlights a novel variable unexplored in previous studies: the feeling of certainty (FOC). The model is grounded in an emerging understanding of brain function that acknowledges the contributions of intuitive cognitions in making decisions, such as whether or not to accept a particular theoretical explanation of events…
All of our hypothesis tests corroborated the idea that FOC plays a moderating role in relationships among evolutionary knowledge and beliefs.
One statement has complex and alarming implications as it could offer an encouragement to double upon on the propaganda so as to ensure the erasure of doubt:
Educational research into acceptance of evolutionary theory will likely benefit from increased attention to non-conscious intuitive cognitions that give rise to
feeling of knowing or certainty.
Learn more here:
Education Questions and Answers
Evolution in American education and the demise of its public school system
I thought belief in a God was largely about faith? "If you believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead". Is faith not a "gut feeling"?
ReplyDeleteYour comment is based on ignorance and it is not intellectually honest too.
DeleteFor example, please explain what the Greek word translated faith in the New Testament means - the word pistis. Make sure you address this material: http://www.tektonics.org/whatis/whatfaith.html
Also, why did some of the apostles who were taught under Jesus mention that they were eyewitnesses and why did they mention that Jesus fulfilled Messianic prophecies in the Old Testament if evidence didn't matter?
Also, are you an atheist? If so, what proof and evidence do you have that atheism is true?
Next, there is plenty of evidence that Christianity is true and none that atheism is true. See:
Evidence for Christianity
In addition, atheism is a religion: see: http://creation.com/atheism-a-religion and http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/Kitzmiller%27s_error_summary.pdf and http://www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org/Kitzmiller%27s_Error.pdf
Next, are you willing to have a debate centered around the
15 questions for evolutionists
via a recorded oral debate which would be distributed to tens of thousands of people.
If you are confident in your evolutionary beliefs, please make the necessary arrangements via this free chat room: http://login.meetcheap.com/conference,89538844 You can make the necessary arrangements with the chat room moderators Shockofgod or VivaYehshua. Alternatively, you can email Shockofgod via his YouTube email at http://www.youtube.com/user/shockofgod
If you want to know more about the debate, any and all questions should be directed to Shockofgod or VivaYehshua
Wow...just wow
Deletefaith
confidence or trust in a person or thing: faith in another's ability.
belief that is [b]not based on proof[/b]: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.
belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion: the firm faith of the Pilgrims.
a system of religious belief: the Christian faith; the Jewish faith.
The biblical books and new testament 'scrolls' were written well after Christ would have lived and died, dictated and/or authored by many different people, including plenty of fakes. The Council of Nicene decided which ones were most appropriate and fit their ideas of the christian faith and included them as 'official' gospels based on these decisions.
And atheism is a distinct lack of religion. Saying atheism is a religion is like saying that a hole is a type of soil.
As for proof, the proof for evolution is overwhelming and, even if there were ZERO physical proof yet to be found, we could still 'prove' it both logically and by experimentation with lifeforms that have very short generational spans (like fruit flies or certain bacterias).
There is evidence that certain events in the bible are true, but there is no evidence in the slightest of any supernatural happenings other than supposed eyewitness accounts, and that is hardly admissible as legitimate evidence without further either physical evidence or data.
Chadwick,
DeleteA few points:
1. You lack facts to buttress your claims about the Bible. I do not find them compelling
2. You lack depth of understanding when it comes to philosophy.
Please give me an Encyclopedia of Philosophy that defines atheism as merely a lack of belief in the existence of God.
Atheism, as defined by the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, and other philosophy reference works, is the denial of the existence of God.
See:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/
http://creation.com/atheism-is-more-rational
http://www.thedivineconspiracy.org/athart3.htm
3. What proof and evidence do you have that atheism is true?
4.
Are you willing to have a debate centered around the 15 questions for evolutionists (see: http://creation.com/15-questions )
via a recorded oral debate which would be distributed to tens of thousands of people.
If you are confident in your evolutionary beliefs, please make the necessary arrangements via this free chat room: http://login.meetcheap.com/conference,89538844 You can make the necessary arrangements with the chat room moderators Shockofgod or VivaYehshua. Alternatively, you can email Shockofgod via his YouTube email at http://www.youtube.com/user/shockofgod
If you want to know more about the debate, any and all questions should be directed to Shockofgod or VivaYehshua
There will be no future communication with you via this blog until you accept this debate offer and carry through with the debate.
Saying "yeah, well your thing doesn't have evidence either" is hardly the right way to make the case, because creationism has more intuitive appeal than evolution.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate that so much of the primary source was shared. It makes clear that the study is only saying that lay persons given an intuitive overview of evolution are more strongly affected by their prior position than by evaluation for or against the new information. Belief for and against evolution "boils down to a gut feeling." People aren't always rational, that's nothing new.
James Gurian,
DeleteAre you an evolutionist?
If so, are you willing to have a debate centered around the 15 questions for evolutionists (see: http://creation.com/15-questions )
via a recorded oral debate which would be distributed to tens of thousands of people.
If you are confident in your evolutionary beliefs, please make the necessary arrangements via this free chat room: http://login.meetcheap.com/conference,89538844 You can make the necessary arrangements with the chat room moderators Shockofgod or VivaYehshua. Alternatively, you can email Shockofgod via his YouTube email at http://www.youtube.com/user/shockofgod
If you want to know more about the debate, any and all questions should be directed to Shockofgod or VivaYehshua
If you are an evolutionist, there will be no future communication with you via this blog until you accept this debate offer and carry through with the debate. We certainly do not want to waste our time with evolutionist posers who lack any real conviction. Hence, the debate offer.