contributors.

ro
http://www.contributors.ro/administratie/educatie/teoria-evolutiei-trebuie-sa-se-predea-din-nou-in-scolile-din-romania/

Teoria evoluiei trebuie s se predea din nou n colile din

Romnia
Faptul c pachetul de teorii biologice cuplate prin care se explic procesul de evoluie natural, cunoscute n
limbaj comun ca teoria evoluiei, nu se mai predau de civa ani buni n coli ne plaseaz n afara lumii civilizate.
Cauza principal a eliminrii teoriei evoluiei este imaturitatea pieei ideilor din Romnia, n care persoanele se
raporteaz la teoria evoluiei, i nu numai, aproape exclusiv pentru utilizarea n scopuri ideologice (n acest caz
particular eugeniste, ateiste sau creaioniste) i aproape deloc pentru un interes obiective de cunoatere. O pia
matur a ideilor ar permite s acceptm social c nu exist nici o incompatibilitate ntre cretinism, religie n
general, i teoria evoluiei.
n acest text mi-am propus s prezint contextul internaional i romnesc al predrii teoriei darwiniene n coli.
Cteva informaii relevante cu privire la predarea teoriei darwiniene n colile din Romnia sunt:
Rezoluia Parlamentului European cu privire la pericolele creaionismului
Declaraia academiilor din lume cu privire la predarea teoriei evoluiei
Situaia n Rusia n ce privete predarea teoriei evoluiei
Vulnerabilitatea Romniei n ce privete receptarea teoriei darwiniene
O arhiv pentru uz personal cu literatur de specialitate despre receptarea lui Darwin n Europa de est i
despre situaia creaionismului n lume, ndeosebi n Europa.
Rezoluia PE, declaraia academiilor, situaia n Rusia
n anul 2007 Parlamentul European emitea rezoluia 1580 cu privire la pericolele creaionismului, n care se face
referire i la declaraia cu privire la predarea teoriei evoluiei semnat de numeroase academii din lume
(prezentat n Anexa 1 a acestui text). Pe plan internaional utilizarea ideologic a teoriei darwiniene este la ora
actual respins nu doar de ctre biologi de valoare excepional care lucreaz n domeniul evoluiei ca Stephen
Jay Gold (Nonoverlapping Magisteria aici ), dar i de ctre cvasi-totalitatea oamenilor de tiin din lume (Anexa
2, declaraia Academiilor de tiine).
Academia Romn, Academia Rusiei i Academia Ucrainei sunt singurele academii din ri importante ortodoxe
care (dup cum rezult de aici) nu au semnat documentul la care se face referire n articolul 20 al rezoluiei PE. n
2006 teoria evoluiei biologice fusese deja eliminat din programa de liceu de ctre ministrul Hrdu, iar n Rusia
ncepuse o aciune sistematic pentru eliminarea ei. Situaia din Rusia arat la ce folosise eliminarea nvrii
teoriei evoluiei, citez dintr-un autor rus (Konashev 2008):

The role of main exposer and prosecutor of the evolutionary theory was voluntary
undertaken by Russian Orthodox Church. The head of Russian orthodox church, the Most
holy Patriarch Moscow and all Russia Alex of II, has officially declared: Comprehension by
the person, that he is a wreath of Gods creation, only ennobles him and if somebody wants
to think that he has descend from the monkey let so to think, but do not impose these views to
others
In the beginning of February 2006 at press conference devoted to past Christmas readings in the
Kremlin, the manager of the Moscow patriarchy metropolitan of Kaluga and of Borov Kliment has
called to people to refuse old textbooks of biology in which the origin of the man is treated from the
point of view of Darwins theory of evolution.

This appeal has been heard. One of the most typical and loud, sensational anti-darwinian
event became court hearing under the claim of the schoolgirl of 10-th class of 148-th grammar
school of Saint-Petersburg, Masha Shrajber against Darwin. Charges of the evolutionary
theory in all mortal sins have captivated the Internet. In particular on one of web-sites it has been
declared the godless character of darwinism.
Many books on the orthodox concept of evolutionary biology were printed instead of that on the
darwinian theory of evolution. That is simply the renewed doctrine of creation of the universe.
A lot of translations of foreign similar products, including that devoted scientific
creationism, are published too. Simultaneously Russian Orthodox Church at first gradually
and then more and more openly and persistently press for introduction in schools of new
course that is so-called Bases of orthodox culture, as a matter of fact, the notorious Gods law
The official purpose of Russian Orthodox Church is following: From the orthodox point of view it
is desirable, that all education system has been constructed on the religious foundations and
based on Christian values
Informal super task of Russian orthodox church is not only to appropriate that place (and function)
which in a society of real socialism the ideological device of the communist party of the
Soviet Union (CPSU) had, including corresponding departments of the Central Committee of
the CPSU, but also, finally, to determine a general line of the development of Russia and to
stop any possible deviations from this line.
Total rejection of Soviet Utopia and Soviet myth in the post soviet Russia demanded refusal of
the evolutionary theory. The same logic demanded not simply returning to old regimes and
traditions of imperial Russia. With inevitability it was necessary to surpass them and to build a
certain reserve of durability. One of official modern ideologists wrote in 2003: Only a formation of
information special troops will allow Russia to avoid the hugest losses and do not repeat mistakes
of 1914-1917

As a result old, already once the gone bankrupt formula, that is autocracy, Orthodoxy and nationality have
been revived and only slightly renewed
Vulnerabilitatea Romniei n privina receptrii corecte a teoriei darwiniene
n Romnia pn acum a fost dificil s receptezi doar partea tiinific a teoriei darwiniene, decuplat de
instrumentalizrile ei ideologice pseudo-tiinifice inevitabile social. Presiunea social asupra intelectualilor este
de a te poziiona ca ateist sau creaionist i se reflect i asupra atitudinii oamenilor de tiin.
Biologii romni au adoptat n timp:
fie poziii eugeniste la catedr, cu excese ideologizante n textele lor nu doar jenante, ci i periculoase (a
se vedea lucrile istoricului Marius Turda, link; recent s-a publicat i o traducere a unei din crile sale la
Ed. Polirom: aici; un detaliu semnificativ este acordul patriarhului Miron Cristea la instituionalizarea
eugenismului),
fie ateiste (tipic este cazul lui Nicolae Botnariuc n contextul stalinist coordonat de Traian Svulescu n
tiina romn, reverberat n manuale colare i lucrri de popularizare proletcultiste n perioada comunist
din anii 50 i 60),
fie creaioniste (cazul lui Nicolae Paulescu n antebelic, urmat de noii biologi creaioniti dup 1989).
Textele materialist dialectice, staliniste i prolet-cultiste, dar i cele creaioniste ale unor biologi romni pot fi citite
la Biblioteca Central Universitar i Biblioteca Academiei. Un studiu istoric detaliat al doamnei Oghin-Pavie de
la Universitatea din Rennes cu privire la lysenkoismul n Romnia (distorsionare a teoriei evoluiei n anii 50) este
n curs de apariie ntr-un volum ce va fi publicat la o editur internaional de prestigiu. Despre cele petrecute n
biologia sovietic i romneasc n acea perioad a publict nc din perioada comunismului i cercettorul emigrat

Denis Buican. n Romnia doar s-au construit i distrus cariere pe aceste baze ideologice, ns n alte ri
consecinele au fost mult mai grave. O arhiv pentru uz personal cu articole relevante pentru receptarea lui
Darwin n Romnia i Europa de est (ntre care i articolul citat al lui Konashev) se poate descrca de aici: link. O
arhiv pentru uz personal cu articole cu privire la situaia creaionismului n lume i n particular n Europa se
poate descrca de aici: link.
Din punct de vedere strict tiinific contribuia biologiei romneti la dezvoltarea teoriei evoluiei biologice n ultimii
150 de ani pe plan internaional este, n ansamblu, extrem de redus, cu excepia eforturilor unor cercettori
emigrai din ar i a unor cercetri efectuate dup 1989, dup ieirea din izolare i racordarea la comunitatea
internaional. Ca rezultat majoritatea oamenilor vorbesc din cri, nu i pe baza propriilor cercetri i lucrri
tiinifice.
n aceste condiii nu este suprinztor c BOR nu are nc specialitii necesari n toate domeniile tinifice care s
i permit s realizeze caracterul de impostur al creaionismului. Exist, totui, o delimitare instituional a BOR
de creaionism n primul pe criterii de bun sim (Falsa problem a predrii creaionismului, link). Ceea ce nu se
poate susine n aceast poziie a BOR din perspectiva omului de tiin este doar faptul c teoria evoluiei este n
mod necesar ideologizat; nu, ea se poate face foarte bine ca hard science, dup cum o dovedesc publicaiile de
specialitate existena fenomenului evoluiei nu este mai ipotetic dect existena atomilor, electronilor, a
universului ca model folositor al lumii, capabil de explicare i uneori de predicie, furnizat de tiinele naturii printro metodologie bine precizat. Cu precizarea c lumea nu se reduce la acest model al universului, fapt pe care l
resping adepii abordrilor scientiste frecvent i ateiste.
Ideologizarea educaiei tiinifice i religioase a cetenilor este o vulnerabilitate important a Romniei. Oamenii
de tiin, filosofii tiinei i teologii au datoria civic s fac tot ce depinde de ei pentru ca ideologiile care susin
autoritarismele de orice form, cu consecinele lor distructive asupra libertii de gndire, s nu se poat dezvolta
n Romnia. Iar guvernul are responsabilitatea s susin cercetarea fundamental n toate domeniile biologiei,
nu doar n cele cu abordri reducioniste, fie i ca instrument pentru crearea unei mase critice de oameni
nevulnerabili la manipulare ideologic, direct avizai cu privire la ce nseamn concret n tiin motenitoarele
actuale ale teoriei darwiniene.
Operaional, decidenii ar trebui s includ ct mai curnd teoria evoluiei n programa colar, cu obligaia din
partea celor care o predau s nu o utilizeze n scopuri ideologice, ci exclusiv descriptive: un model pe baze
tiinifice al modului n care organismele biologice s-au schimbat n timp. Relaiile dintre modelele biologiei i cele
propuse de alte tipuri de discursuri cum sunt cele religioase, mpreun cu felul n care oamenii creaz astfel de
modele i la ce le folosesc, se pot nelege, de ctre cine are astfel de curiziti, la orele de filosofie.

Anexa 1 Rezoluia 1580 (2007) a Parlamentului European

The dangers of creationism in education
1. The aim of this resolution is not to question or to fight a belief the right to freedom of belief does
not permit that. The aim is to warn against certain tendencies to pass off a belief as science. It is
necessary to separate belief from science. It is not a matter of antagonism. Science and belief must
be able to coexist. It is not a matter of opposing belief and science, but it is necessary to prevent
belief from opposing science.
2. For some people the Creation, as a matter of religious belief, gives a meaning to life.
Nevertheless, the Parliamentary Assembly is worried about the possible ill-effects of the spread of
creationist ideas within our education systems and about the consequences for our democracies. If
we are not careful, creationism could become a threat to human rights, which are a key concern of
the Council of Europe.
3. Creationism, born of the denial of the evolution of species through natural selection, was for a
long time an almost exclusively American phenomenon. Today creationist ideas are tending to find
their way into Europe and their spread is affecting quite a few Council of Europe member states.

4. The prime target of present-day creationists, most of whom are of the Christian or Muslim faith, is
education. Creationists are bent on ensuring that their ideas are included in the school science
syllabuses. Creationism cannot, however, lay claim to being a scientific discipline.
5. Creationists question the scientific character of certain areas of knowledge and argue that the
theory of evolution is only one interpretation among others. They accuse scientists of not providing
enough evidence to establish the theory of evolution as scientifically valid. On the contrary,
creationists defend their own statements as scientific. None of this stands up to objective analysis.
6. We are witnessing a growth of modes of thought which challenge established knowledge about
nature, evolution, our origins and our place in the universe.
7. There is a real risk of serious confusion being introduced into our childrens minds between what
has to do with convictions, beliefs, ideals of all sorts and what has to do with science. An all things
are equal attitude may seem appealing and tolerant, but is in fact dangerous.
8. Creationism has many contradictory aspects. The intelligent design idea, which is the latest,
more refined version of creationism, does not deny a certain degree of evolution. However,
intelligent design, presented in a more subtle way, seeks to portray its approach as scientific, and
therein lies the danger.
9. The Assembly has constantly insisted that science is of fundamental importance. Science has
made possible considerable improvements in living and working conditions and is a rather
significant factor in economic, technological and social development. The theory of evolution has
nothing to do with divine revelation but is built on facts.
10. Creationism claims to be based on scientific rigour. In reality the methods employed by
creationists are of three types: purely dogmatic assertions; distorted use of scientific quotations,
sometimes illustrated with magnificent photographs; and backing from more or less well-known
scientists, most of whom are not specialists in these matters. By these means creationists seek to
appeal to non-specialists and spread doubt and confusion in their minds.
11. Evolution is not simply a matter of the evolution of humans and of populations. Denying it could
have serious consequences for the development of our societies. Advances in medical research,
aiming at combating infectious diseases such as Aids, are impossible if every principle of evolution
is denied. One cannot be fully aware of the risks involved in the significant decline in biodiversity
and climate change if the mechanisms of evolution are not understood.
12. Our modern world is based on a long history, of which the development of science and
technology forms an important part. However, the scientific approach is still not well understood
and this is liable to encourage the development of all manner of fundamentalism and extremism.
The total rejection of science is definitely one of the most serious threats to human and civic rights.
13. The war on the theory of evolution and on its proponents most often originates in forms of
religious extremism closely linked to extreme right-wing political movements. The creationist
movements possess real political power. The fact of the matter, and this has been exposed on
several occasions, is that some advocates of strict creationism are out to replace democracy by
theocracy.
14. All leading representatives of the main monotheistic religions have adopted a much more
moderate attitude. Pope Benedict XVI, for example, as his predecessor Pope John-Paul II, today
praises the role of science in the evolution of humanity and recognises that the theory of evolution
is more than a hypothesis.
15. The teaching of all phenomena concerning evolution as a fundamental scientific theory is
therefore crucial to the future of our societies and our democracies. For that reason it must occupy
a central position in the curriculums, and especially in the science syllabuses, as long as, like any

other theory, it is able to stand up to thorough scientific scrutiny. Evolution is present everywhere,
from medical overprescription of antibiotics that encourages the emergence of resistant bacteria to
agricultural overuse of pesticides that causes insect mutations on which pesticides no longer have
any effect.
16. The Council of Europe has highlighted the importance of teaching about culture and religion. In
the name of freedom of expression and individual belief, creationist ideas, as any other theological
position, could possibly be presented as an addition to cultural and religious education, but they
cannot claim scientific respectability.
17. Science provides irreplaceable training in intellectual rigour. It seeks not to explain why things
are but to understand how they work.
18. Investigation of the creationists growing influence shows that the arguments between
creationism and evolution go well beyond intellectual debate. If we are not careful, the values that
are the very essence of the Council of Europe will be under direct threat from creationist
fundamentalists. It is part of the role of the Council of Europes parliamentarians to react before it is
too late.
19. The Parliamentary Assembly therefore urges the member states, and especially their education
authorities to:
19.1. defend and promote scientific knowledge;
19.2. strengthen the teaching of the foundations of science, its history, its epistemology and its
methods alongside the teaching of objective scientific knowledge;
19.3. make science more comprehensible, more attractive and closer to the realities of the
contemporary world;
19.4. firmly oppose the teaching of creationism as a scientific discipline on an equal footing with the
theory of evolution and in general the presentation of creationist ideas in any discipline other than
religion;
19.5. promote the teaching of evolution as a fundamental scientific theory in the school
curriculums.
20. The Assembly welcomes the fact that 27 academies of science of Council of Europe member
states signed, in June 2006, a declaration on the teaching of evolution and calls on academies of
science that have not yet done so to sign the declaration.
Assembly debate on 4 October 2007 (35th Sitting) (see Doc. 11375, report of the Committee on
Culture, Science and Education, rapporteur: Mrs Brasseur). Text adopted by the Assembly on 4
October 2007 (35th Sitting). (link; raportul care a stat la baza rezoluiei este aici, iar un
memorandum de rspuns care apra creaionismul n numele libertii de exprimare aici)
Anexa 2 Declaraia academiilor de tiin cu privire la predare teoriei evoluiei.
We, the undersigned Academies of Sciences, have learned that in various parts of the world,
within science courses taught in certain public systems of education, scientific evidence, data,
and testable theories about the origins and evolution of life on Earth are being concealed,
denied, or confused with theories not testable by science. We urge decision makers, teachers,
and parents to educate all children about the methods and discoveries of science and to
foster an understanding of the science of nature. Knowledge of the natural world in which they
live empowers people to meet human needs and protect the planet.
We agree that the following evidence-based facts about the origins and evolution of the Earth

and of life on this planet have been established by numerous observations and independently
derived experimental results from a multitude of scientific disciplines. Even if there are still
many open questions about the precise details of evolutionary change, scientific evidence has
never contradicted these results:
1. In a universe that has evolved towards its present configuration for some 11 to 15 billion
years, our Earth formed approximately 4.5 billion years ago.
2. Since its formation, the Earth its geology and its environments has changed under
the effect of numerous physical and chemical forces and continues to do so.
3. Life appeared on Earth at least 2.5 billion years ago. The evolution, soon after, of
photosynthetic organisms enabled, from at least 2 billion years ago, the slow transformation of
the atmosphere to one containing substantial quantities of oxygen. In addition to the release of
the oxygen that we breathe, the process of photosynthesis is the ultimate source of fixed
energy and food upon which human life on the planet depends.
4. Since its first appearance on Earth, life has taken many forms, all of which continue to
evolve, in ways which palaeontology and the modern biological and biochemical sciences are
describing and independently confirming with increasing precision. Commonalities in the
structure of the genetic code of all organisms living today, including humans, clearly indicate
their common primordial origin.
We also subscribe to the following statement regarding the nature of science in relation to the
teaching of evolution and, more generally, of any field of scientific knowledge :
Scientific knowledge derives from a mode of inquiry into the nature of the universe that
has been successful and of great consequence. Science focuses on (i) observing the
natural world and (ii) formulating testable and refutable hypotheses to derive deeper
explanations for observable phenomena. When evidence is sufficiently compelling,
scientific theories are developed that account for and explain that evidence, and
predict the likely structure or process of still unobserved phenomena.
Human understanding of value and purpose are outside of natural sciences
scope. However, a number of components scientific, social, philosophical, religious,
cultural and political contribute to it. These different fields owe each other mutual
consideration, while being fully aware of their own areas of action and their limitations.
While acknowledging current limitations, science is open ended, and subject to correction and
expansion as new theoretical and empirical understanding emerges.

1. Albanian Academy of Sciences

2. National Academy of Exact, Physical and
Natural Sciences, Argentina
3. Australian Academy of Science
4. Austrian Academy of Sciences
5. Bangladesh Academy of Sciences
6. The Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium
7. Academy of Sciences and Arts of Bosnia and Herzegovina

8. Brazilian Academy of Sciences

9. Bulgarian Academy of Sciences
10. RSC: The Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada
11. Academia Chilena de Ciencias
12. Chinese Academy of Sciences
13. Academia Sinica, China, Taiwan
14. Colombian Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences
15. Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences
16. Cuban Academy of Sciences
17. Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic
18. Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters
19. Academy of Scientific Research and Technology,
Egypt
20. Acadmie des Sciences, France
21. Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities
22. The Academy of Athens, Greece
23. Hungarian Academy of Sciences
24. Indian National Science Academy
25. Indonesian Academy of Sciences
26. Academy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran
27. Royal Irish Academy
28. Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities
29. Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy
30. Science Council of Japan
31. Kenya National Academy of Sciences
32. National Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Republic
33. Latvian Academy of Sciences
34. Lithuanian Academy of Sciences
35. Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts
36. Academia Mexicana de Ciencias
37. Mongolian Academy of Sciences

38. Academy of the Kingdom of Morocco

39. The Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and
Sciences
40. Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand
41. Nigerian Academy of Sciences
42. Pakistan Academy of Sciences
43. Palestine Academy for Science and Technology
44. Academia Nacional de Ciencias del Peru
45. National Academy of Science and Technology,
The Philippines
46. Polish Academy of Sciences
47. Acadmie des Sciences et Techniques du Sngal
48. Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts
49. Singapore National Academy of Sciences
50. Slovak Academy of Sciences
51. Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts
52. Academy of Science of South Africa
53. Royal Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spain
54. National Academy of Sciences, Sri Lanka
55. Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
56. Council of the Swiss Scientific Academies
57. Academy of Sciences, Republic of Tajikistan
58. The Caribbean Academy of Sciences
59. Turkish Academy of Sciences
60. The Uganda National Academy of Sciences
61. The Royal Society, UK
62. US National Academy of Sciences
63. Uzbekistan Academy of Sciences
64. Academia de Ciencias Fsicas, Matemticas y Naturales de Venezuela
65. Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences
66. African Academy of Sciences

67. The Academy of Sciences for the Developing World (TWAS)

68. The Executive Board of the International Council for Science (ICSU)(link)

Ai informatii despre tema de mai sus? Poti contribui la o mai buna intelegere a subiectului? Scrie articolul tau si
trimite-l la editor[at]contributors.ro