Post by Joanna Polisena on Sept 1, 2011 11:30:13 GMT -5
Evolution? Children do Adam and Eve it
I agree that kids are capable of learning about topics we, as adults, might deem too complex for them. My thought it to present information, get feedback, and modify as needed to make it more understandable. Sure, I make mistakes, but I have the confidence my little man can and will eventually understand everything, and I'm not opposed to challenging my own perceptions about his limitations.
But, Dawkins writes, "Children’s fairytales are replete with anti-essentialist propaganda. Mice turn into white horses, and pumpkins into gleaming coaches at the touch of a fairy’s wand. It takes only a kiss for a frog to morph into a handsome prince. Such radical changes undermine [German-American zoologist Ernst] Mayr’s essentialist bogeyman. Indeed, they go too far in the other direction. Magical transformations are not just anti-essentialist, they are anti-evolution, too. And anti-science. Complex things, such as horses, coaches and princes, cannot spring spontaneously into existence from nothing; nor can they be spawned in a puff of smoke from other complex things, such as mice, pumpkins and frogs..."
Ending with: "I have sometimes worried about the educational effects of fairytales. Could they be pernicious, leading children down pathways of gullibility towards anti-scientific superstition and religion? Maybe. But could they also be beneficial, in leading children away from static essentialism and towards a state of mind that is receptive to the dynamics of evolution?
"I don’t know. And, as so often when I don’t know the answer to a question, I’d like to find out."
I feel like he's reading too much into fairy tales. There is a valuable life lesson in these stories and that is using imagination, understanding what is fantasy. I haven't done any studies, but, as a child, I loved playing make-believe.
Discuss?
I agree that kids are capable of learning about topics we, as adults, might deem too complex for them. My thought it to present information, get feedback, and modify as needed to make it more understandable. Sure, I make mistakes, but I have the confidence my little man can and will eventually understand everything, and I'm not opposed to challenging my own perceptions about his limitations.
But, Dawkins writes, "Children’s fairytales are replete with anti-essentialist propaganda. Mice turn into white horses, and pumpkins into gleaming coaches at the touch of a fairy’s wand. It takes only a kiss for a frog to morph into a handsome prince. Such radical changes undermine [German-American zoologist Ernst] Mayr’s essentialist bogeyman. Indeed, they go too far in the other direction. Magical transformations are not just anti-essentialist, they are anti-evolution, too. And anti-science. Complex things, such as horses, coaches and princes, cannot spring spontaneously into existence from nothing; nor can they be spawned in a puff of smoke from other complex things, such as mice, pumpkins and frogs..."
Ending with: "I have sometimes worried about the educational effects of fairytales. Could they be pernicious, leading children down pathways of gullibility towards anti-scientific superstition and religion? Maybe. But could they also be beneficial, in leading children away from static essentialism and towards a state of mind that is receptive to the dynamics of evolution?
"I don’t know. And, as so often when I don’t know the answer to a question, I’d like to find out."
I feel like he's reading too much into fairy tales. There is a valuable life lesson in these stories and that is using imagination, understanding what is fantasy. I haven't done any studies, but, as a child, I loved playing make-believe.
Discuss?