How many of us have taken English Comp II or are taking it this semester? Or Abnormal Psychology for that matter? What is a common theme that is often referred to in those classes, or any other class? Critical Thinking. I would venture to guess there is a large percent of us who know about the ‘critical thinking rubric,’ that we have to evaluate our papers on and how annoying they all are. I know my reaction to the critical thinking rubric my first semester as a freshmen was like, “Really? Who cares? I just wanna write the freakin’ paper, get a good grade so I can go back to playing my violent video games.” But as I’ve progressed here at SCCC/ATS I’ve definitely grown to see my need for this type of thinking. So what is critical thinking? Dictionary.com (I would be lost without you!) defines critical thinking this way: Critical Thinking – Noun, disciplined thinking that is clear, rational, open-minded, and informed by evidence. Simply put, we learn to think for ourselves. I find it very troubling, and in more ways than one an oxymoron, that the college prides itself on teaching students to think critically in almost every area, but when it comes to the area of science, I find that I’m only being presented with one side of an argument, only one interpretation of the data. I wonder if there has been a particular way of thinking that has been embraced which states, “science is absolute, everything else is relative and subject to personal interpretation.” Yes, my friends, I am talking about evolution. May I pose this question, just simply as food for thought: Doesn’t it seem a bit, oh, I don’t know… Bias to only present one interpretation of the information? Oh, of course the materialistic world view is all about trying to explain things purely with physical changes in things that can be measured by man, and so the explanation of a God who exists outside of time and space who is infinitely powerful enough to design everything down to the smallest atom seems completely unscientific, and rooted in mythology. Sure, each side will have it’s views and arguments. That’s what taking a stand is about. But to only present one side, and dismiss the other as petty, silly unscientific myth is what I’m talking about when I say ‘bias.’ Many evolutionists give Creationists such a hard time not because of the evidence and facts they put forward, but it’s because they won’t bend to the way of thinking that eliminates the supernatural. How come we are being taught ideas that have been disregarded years ago, even by evolutionists themselves? Is it because of bad economics that our text books just havent caught up with the “latest findings?” Or is it because there is an agenda? Why aren’t evolutionists putting forth ALL of the facts and the counter arguments? Isn’t that what education and critical thinking is really about? Honestly, what are they so afraid of? The way science is taught and portrayed in most colleges, and schools is not a means of education, but a form of indoctrination. Brainwashing. My goal in writing future columns is to present evidence and arguments to the contrary, to give students with a different take on things something to stand on. Don’t be fooled by something just because it’s presented as a fact. Lets consider alternatives and actually think critically in the area of science, instead of being force fed what we are intended to think. Zach Carpenter will continue the discussion of this topic in Part 2 on Nov. 9.