Critical care of creationism

Abstract

In this response paper, we continue and further expand upon Elizabeth Watts’ discussion on Buddhism and science, in the context of teachers’ searching for the pedagogical “means to increasing student receptivity to science.” While we share Watts’ concern over the detrimental consequences of creationism in schools, we also offer an extended discussion on Watts’ discourse on Buddhism and science, and the educational importance of care in the creationistic classroom. Namely, we argue that Watts’ promotion of Buddhism as an exemplar for the compatibility between spirituality and science implicitly frames Buddhism as a religion that is intrinsically amenable to science. Such framing is both an insufficient presentation of Buddhism as a religion and, pedagogically, a less than optimal way to address and resolve the educational problems of creationism. We provide an extended discussion of Watts’ discourse by elaborating upon Buddhism in its negotiative cultural, historical, and doctrinal situations. We argue that by situating Buddhism in such a situational context, Watts can lessen the risk of overshadowing the potential of creationist and Christian students in connecting with scientific values. In other words, it is to utilize Buddhism not as an enshrined distinction for its scientific amenability per se, but as a relatable possibility that can also be discovered, cultivated, and cared for in the particular faiths and identities of the students. Ultimately, our calling as educators is to walk with the students along the journey of curious and open inquiry while gently and skillfully holding their faithful commitments in the container of compassion and trust.