In “Political Theory and the Teaching of Creationism,” Francis Schrag offers a solution to the argument of teaching creationism verses evolution in public schools. The author’s central argument is to challenge those who wish to find a basis in contemporary democratic and liberal theory from which to refuse creationism in the curriculum of public schools (Schrag, 2001). In this essay I first plan to provide an analysis of Schrag’s essay. The skeleton of his argument is as follows:

1. Challenge to Democratic theory against creationism.

2. Challenge to Liberal theory against creationism.

Secondly, in this essay I plan to critique of Schrag’s first argument his challenge to Democratic theory tracing it to her cited source Democratic Education written by Amy Gutmann.

In Schrag’s first argument, he argues against Amy Gutmann’s democratic argument against teaching creationism in public schools. Gutmann (1987) states that teaching creationism as science imposes a sectarian religious view on all children in the guise of science, but teaching Darwinism alone does not constitute the imposition of a sectarian secular

For liberals in which individual autonomy is the predominant value, Schrag (2001) says that if a child is to have individual autonomy, his education cannot remain exclusively secular, but rather include many different views.

Gutmann (1987) also states that although many Americans have reconciled their religious faith and the findings of science, in our religiously diverse society, secular standards of reasoning accommodate greater agreement upon a common education then religious faith, because secular standards are a both fairer and firmer basis for reconciling our differences (pg. 103). Schrag (2001) says that although the majority of Americans somewhat believe Darwinism, and Darwinism rejects creationism, that is not a basis to completely reject creationism as a means to a more peacefully reconcile our differences.

view (pg. 103). Schrag (2001) states that this outlook lacks symmetry.

Francis Schrag and Amy Gutmann seem to have the same ideas about teaching creationism is school, only Schrag feels Gutmann did not build her case strong enough. She never states that Gutmann’s argument against creationism in school is not correct, only that her arguments leave too much room for dispute. For example, Gutmann’s argument that states that teaching creationism as science imposes a sectarian religious view on all children in the guise of science, but teaching Darwinism alone does not constitute the imposition of a sectarian secular view. Schrag states that this outlook lacks symmetry. Schrag does not deny her point of view, he only states the she did not argue her case well enough to prove it is true.

Some topics in this essay:
William Galston's, Amy Gutmann’s, Amy Gutmann, Basically Gutmann, Matter Method”, Teaching Creationism”, Francis Schrag, Darwinism Darwinism, Macedo's Gutmann’s, Darwinism Schrag, schrag 2001, public schools, teaching creationism, creationism public, creationism public schools, democratic theory, 2001 schrag 2001, future citizens, 2001 schrag, argument teaching, gutmann’s argument, liberal theory, argument teaching creationism, schrag 2001 schrag, teaching creationism public,