To fathom the notion of creationism, one must primarily understand the concepts of science and pseudoscience. Popper defines science on the criterion of falsification and this becomes the means of distinguishing what is considered science (disprovable) and what is pseudoscience (cannot be disproved) (Popper 1963, p.160). Philosophically, the notion of pseudoscience encompasses all that is not science philosophy, religion and other bodies of human belief (Ruse Summer1982, p.72). Is creationism hence, science or pseudoscience? Creationism is simply the belief that the universe was created by the acts of a supernatural power. (Beckwith 2003, p.460). Thus it becomes blatantly obvious that the conventional assumption among society is that creationism is not a science, as it is impossible to test and prove whether the divine power is true or not, it is simply a belief that individuals adhere to. This essay will correspond to the arguments of Ruse, Laudan and Gilkey raised about the Arkansas Trial 1981 to illustrate that the notion of creationism is not a science nor was the trial a success for the improvement of scientific education. Creationism inevitably is, but a series of beliefs based on sacred texts, thus should be considered religion part of the pseudo scientific ideals. .
The main arguments to consider revolve around the discussions raised in the Arkansas Trial 1981, Mclean vs. State of Arkansas. The defendants, argued for the inclusion of creation science to be taught in public schools and lobbied for the "Balanced Treatment for Creation Science and Evolution-Science Act. (Overton 1982, p.934). However the Judge overruled the defendants case and deemed the act unconstitutional. He through the influence and notions of Michael Ruse created five essential characteristics of science to disallow the addition of creation science into schools; these requirements are derived from the works of Ruse.