tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9818962.post3377771164349116358..comments2024-03-20T13:10:11.477+05:30Comments on nanopolitan: Shivam Vij on Class XII History Text from NCERTAbihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06790560045313883673noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9818962.post-9492900165483609782013-07-22T06:06:12.986+05:302013-07-22T06:06:12.986+05:30Though I have only heard mostly good things about ...Though I have only heard mostly good things about NCERT textbooks for History (use of cartoons and other media from the era being talked about being one of the highlights), what I have seen of some of their science textbooks leaves much to be desired. <br /><br />A case in point is the <a href="http://ncert.nic.in/NCERTS/textbook/textbook.htm?lebo1=7-16" rel="nofollow">chapter</a> on evolution in the Class 12 textbook on Biology. It has the following to say on the question of theories about the origin of life:<br /><br />"Conventional religious literature tells us about the theory of special<br />creation. This theory has three connotations. One, that all living organisms<br />(species or types) that we see today were created as such. Two, that the<br />diversity was always the same since creation and will be the same in future<br />also. Three, that earth is about 4000 years old"<br /><br />Firstly, there is no point paying any kind of lip service to "religious" theories in a class on science. Secondly, the implication that "conventional religious literature" stipulates that the "earth is 4000 years old" is manifestly false in the Indian context; the 4000 years is a figure is a product of certain specific Christian sects, none of which are mainstream enough in India to be considered "conventional". This part looks like it was copied verbatim from some American textbook (where lip service must have been paid to "conventional" figure of 4000 years is done for purposes of political expediency) without the slightest amount of change. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com