June. 1937 



EVOLUTION 



Page Five 



The Confusion Of Tongues 



By OSCAR RIDDLE 

 Carnegie Imtttution of li'ashingtou. Station for Experimental Evolution, Co! J Spring Harbor. 



JpvL RING the past fifteen >ears several states ha\e passed 

 *— ' laws which prohibit the teaching of evolution in their 

 public schools. This prohibition, and a strong sentiment 

 of similar nature elsewhere, implies several most serious 

 things. We know the importance of the textbook, and we 

 may first note that this sentiment has written itself into 

 some text-books vxidelv used in both high school and col- 

 lege. These books put not emphasis 

 but a wet blanket on one or all as- 

 pects of the evolution principle; and 

 they often succeed in leaving only a 

 pale ghost of our science in the stu- 

 dent's hands. I submit as evidence 

 some excerpts from an elementar\' text- 

 book published in 1934 and alread\' in- 

 troduced into more than 131 normal 

 schools and colleges in at least thirtv- 

 seven of our states and territories. A 

 chapter of this book is entitled: "The 

 process of evolution cannot yet be 

 satisfactorily explained." The final 

 section of this chapter is dedicated 

 solely to the proposition that what it 

 calls "the doctrine of evolution is quite 

 compatible with a religious faith." Of 

 course to the untrained pupil this can 

 only mean that it is quite compatible 

 with whatever view of religion, or of 

 the supernatural, he or she happens to 

 have at the moment. I quote from 

 four paragraphs the following illum- 

 inating lines: 



"The reader should remember that e\en Darwin him- 

 self did not believe acceptance of the evolutionary idea to 

 be incompatible with a religious faith . . . Why should the 

 full blown rose, the birds in the trees, the beasts in the field 

 and the stately oaks standing in the forest not be considered 

 as much a part of God's world as the subjects of which the 

 Bible treats?" There follow four lines from the Psalmist, 

 and then this: "If this conception of the universe were kept 

 in mind it would obviate much strife and confusion. The 

 scientist can make no distinction between the natural and 

 the so-called supernatural. What man can study, ex- 

 perience, and learn about through his senses is the natural: 

 the supernatural is that part of the universe which he has 

 not yet been able to understand (sic) or for which his 

 powers of comprehension are too limited. There is no 

 difference between the two. The difference comes only in 

 man himself. ... So, then, since evolution neither denies 

 the existence of God nor disclaims His directive influence 

 over natural processes, it cannot be said," etc., etc. Then, 

 "Finally, it must be remembered that the theory of evo- 

 lution does not attempt to say when, why, or by whom 

 life was first produced upon the earth. The honest scientist 

 when pressed for an answer will say that he does not know." 



Why any text-book whose purpose is to outline and 



guide in the study of Fife-science should contain a single 



word on the subject discussed at such length in this book is 



beyond comprehension. Your zoologist who loves, teaches 



From The Teaching Biologist. V : 2, Nov. 1935 



Dr. OSCAR RIDDLE 



and builds his science vet)' well knows that his task is to 

 facilitate an advantageous encounter between the student 

 and the useful and vitall>- significant phenomena and prin- 

 ciples of biology. As a true scientist he will not rob his 

 teaching of that special and incomparable discipline which 

 onlv the sciences can give — his student will have to wrestle 

 \\ ith the facts and principles he finds. If, and when, aston- 

 ishment at the inclusion of such mater- 

 ial in a text-book is sufticientlv over- 

 come, the biologist who knows that his 

 science to-day is not where Darwin left 

 it will swear that he had not believed 

 it possible — outside of theological dis- 

 cussions — to find words for a few ex- 

 traneous paragraphs that would so 

 defraud our science. 



If one could subtract the emas- 

 culated biology taught from such texts 

 in 1937 from the total for 1933, how 

 would the amount of zoology taught 

 now compare with that in 1903? Some 

 of the zoological text-books of thirty 

 years ago ma}- have been drv; but 

 they were not rotten. 



Our effort is to learn wh)- biologi- 

 cal science has not obtained and 

 maintained its proper place in our 

 schools, and whv great biologic truth 

 is so little possessed by our people. 

 We have yet to search the motivation 

 of those several instances of state laws 

 which prohibit the teaching of evolu- 

 tion. It was traditional religion that thus invoked the heavy 

 hand of legislation. Efsewhere, without invoking the law 

 but with its extended and varied influence, traditional re- 

 ligion is now effecting a wide-spread repression of the teach- 

 ing of this central principle of biologv in our public schools. 

 It sometimes forces the resignation of able zoologists even 

 from college positions; and in high schools and late 

 primarv grades there are probably to-day few places 

 where straightforward teaching of the unmitigated evolu- 

 tion principle can be done except at the peril of the teacher. 

 .An eviscerated straw-man is set up in place of the reality 

 for the younger students of denominational and parochial 

 schools everywhere. Man\- millions of our present and 

 future citizens are robbed of a biological outlook, or they 

 get one that is warped and unrecognizable, through direct 

 responsibility of the church. 



Biologists in nearly all countries, and particularly in 

 our own. have tried a compromise with religious creeds. 

 That compromise has failed. Most youth of 1935, like 

 those of 1839. leave our schools without having opportunity 

 to learn that the worthy facts concerning man's origin and 

 destinv come not from religious traditions but from bio- 

 logical investigations made within the time of men now 

 living. That compromise now robs most modern youth of 

 opportunity to learn what is known concerning his or 

 her place in nature. In what is said here [ am not 

 concerned with the question whether religion is important; 

 nor whether one or another of the creeds of the earth has 



