MSBS
Well-Known Member
- Jul 29, 2002
- 1,860
- 103
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Agnostic
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Libertarian
Oh come now, we have to be realistic here. Certain aspects of medicine have been advance considerably by using the theoretical underpinnings of evolution-- animal testing and modeling provide a far better understanding of medical issues when the predictive ability of evolutionary theory is used when selecting the animal models for testing (as discussed previously). But to say without evolutionary theory we have no modern medicine is ridiculous.
Evolution is in important part of modern biology, but it was the renaissance and a naturalistic world view codified in the scientific method that has made medicine what it is today, not evolution. Such greats as Andreas Vesalius, William Harvey, James Lind, and Edward Jenner all did wonders before any useful theory of evolution was elucidated.
As for the question asked in the IP, what good is evolution?, Ill put it this way-- modern experimental molecular biology relies on it heavily. For example, in my thesis project I am working on a genetic expression mechanism in a species of pathogenic bacteria. Through a process of targeted mutagenesis coupled with the introduction of antibiotic resistance genes and then using selection mechanisms (in this case antibiotics in the growth media) I am able to evolve the bacteria in a specific way, and then check out how this evolution has impacted the bacterias ability to cause disease by using tissue culture models. Every aspect of this experiment involves using techniques that were discovered while looking at evolutionary mechanisms in bacteria. Is an understanding of evolutionary biology necessary for this type of work? Absolutely. Should a college student be expected to understand evolution as an undergrad? Yes, without that understanding many aspects of biology do not tie together, so without it a student would have an incomplete understanding of the subject.
The question is, however, does a sixteen year old need to be exposed to evolution in a high school class in order to understand biology? You can get by without it (I did, it was never taught in my HS), but ultimately the less that is taught in HS the more you will need to makeup while in college. American education is already dismal enough without further watering it down. Many of the better universities no longer offer remedial instruction (at least out here on the west coast), and are suggesting to students that have deficiencies that they make them up elsewhere before trying to compete at a four year university. So ultimately, when you strip an important part of biology out of HS instruction, you are being unfair to those students that wish to continue their education.
Evolution is in important part of modern biology, but it was the renaissance and a naturalistic world view codified in the scientific method that has made medicine what it is today, not evolution. Such greats as Andreas Vesalius, William Harvey, James Lind, and Edward Jenner all did wonders before any useful theory of evolution was elucidated.
As for the question asked in the IP, what good is evolution?, Ill put it this way-- modern experimental molecular biology relies on it heavily. For example, in my thesis project I am working on a genetic expression mechanism in a species of pathogenic bacteria. Through a process of targeted mutagenesis coupled with the introduction of antibiotic resistance genes and then using selection mechanisms (in this case antibiotics in the growth media) I am able to evolve the bacteria in a specific way, and then check out how this evolution has impacted the bacterias ability to cause disease by using tissue culture models. Every aspect of this experiment involves using techniques that were discovered while looking at evolutionary mechanisms in bacteria. Is an understanding of evolutionary biology necessary for this type of work? Absolutely. Should a college student be expected to understand evolution as an undergrad? Yes, without that understanding many aspects of biology do not tie together, so without it a student would have an incomplete understanding of the subject.
The question is, however, does a sixteen year old need to be exposed to evolution in a high school class in order to understand biology? You can get by without it (I did, it was never taught in my HS), but ultimately the less that is taught in HS the more you will need to makeup while in college. American education is already dismal enough without further watering it down. Many of the better universities no longer offer remedial instruction (at least out here on the west coast), and are suggesting to students that have deficiencies that they make them up elsewhere before trying to compete at a four year university. So ultimately, when you strip an important part of biology out of HS instruction, you are being unfair to those students that wish to continue their education.
Upvote
0
to everyone. 
