Should alternatives to Darwinian evolution be taught in public schools?

Question

For example, I hear Lamarck had a theory about evolution. Should we give that equal time?

Answer 1

Only if they had scientific merit. Farmers knew that animals and plants could be bred for traits. Lamarck proposed as explanation that was testable. It failed the test. It did lead to important ideas about germ and somatic, and showed that known biological properties called for an explanation. If ideas are untestable, there is no basis for including them in a science class.

Answer 2

Lamarck is still talked about in evolution classes but his theory was not as plausible as the theory we have now. He's very important because he was the first to actually write down that species change over time as opposed to being static over time. However, his theory stated that species evolved due to over/under use of certain body parts. We know that this is not the case.

Answer 3

No, Lamarck's theory of inherited acquired characteristics has been pretty effectively discredited. However, there are some exceptions. I believe they center around inherited tendencies and capabilities which make them appear to be inherited acquired characteristics, but are not. Third generation actors, for example, may indeed have inherited their good looks, their good memory for scripts, perhaps picked up some by early childhood exposure in ways that are difficult to distinguish from inherited talent.

Answer 4

There is discussion of Lamarck. in fact, with recent understanding of epigenetic evolution, some people think Lamarck may not have been totally wrong (only in some of his ideas however)

Answer 5

Facts should be taught for and against the most prominent theories on the beginning of the world/mankind. Let them choose. Children were onece taught the world was flat no if ands or buts about it. Teach them to think and search for the truth not accept anything just because. Those who think past what is accepted as truth today will change what is viewed as truth for tomorrow.

Answer 6

Well, certainly, Darwinian evolution is not proven and should not be presented as fact. I would say that the schools should go light on the origin of species and creative design (or lack thereof) because the schools will either get wrong or not be properly equipped to teach the concepts involved.

LETS GIVE A SHOUT OUT FOR PRIVATE SCHOOL! OOOHHHH YEEEAAAHHH!!!!

Answer 7

Since we are teaching our kids the theory of evolution, I think we ought to cover everything connected with it.
I have a pretty good idea that most kids these days have picked up on the fact that evolution is a pretty controversial topic. Is it our intention to give them an honest basis to make their own decisions from, or are we trying to hide some facts from them, in the hope that they will just accept whatever they are told?
Unless we are prepared to give our kids the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth as regards their education, we compromise our integrity, and their future.
What is it really worth, then, to be "right"???

Answer 8

Actually Lamarck had a lot to say, some of which wasn't as whacky as many might claim. I say YEA give him time too, since he was an early explorer in the field.

Answer 9

Sure. I also think that children should have the option to take a world religions class if they want. Not as a mandatory class, but as an elective. I did when I was in public school. Very interesting.

Answer 10

survival of the fittest" We should spend more time on teaching that applied in theory actually. We waste so much time pondering other crap let the children of today go on this and break free of the robot mode. Let them teach theirselves about how this world can help them through becoming aware of the true dog eat dog world we live in ,as harsh as it can be schools should teach reality more in depth.