| [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Thread Index] | [Date Prev] | [Date Next] | [Date Index] |
>I saw this article, as well as Dr. Campbell's response to it, and had to respond, because I have just finished reading an excellent book on just this type of problem. "Rocks of Ages" by Stephen Jay Gould could not put this so-called "controversy" between science and religion into better perspective. They do not have to be integrated into a single, unified belief. They can co-exist without incorporating one into the other. In fact, they should not be taught as a single entity. Which religion would you choose to integrate with science in order to teach a "creationist" point of view? I'm sure that most would automatically reply that Christianity would be the only answer. But how is that fair to those who aren't Christian? We can take prayer out of schools, because we might offend those with other religious beliefs, but we can teach what one particular dogma of faith says happened in order for the earth (and ourselves) to come into existence, and "water down" the findings of science because they make students think that the Bible may not be a literal document? I guess that I just don't understand the logic.<
I probably did not make my logic very clear. I was suggesting the book as a useful resource for dealing with antievolutionaists, not as a suitable textbook for Georgia.
It's important to remember that antievolutionism appeals to people primarily because it is perceived as philosophically (usually religiously) correct. This gives two ways to attack it. First, we can try to show that good science is compatible with their philosophy (as well as many others). Secondly, we can raise questions about the philosophical merit of antievolutionism.
As most of us deal primarily with purportedly Christian antievolutionism, books such as Perspectives on an Evolving Creation are useful for providing evidence that evangelical Christians can accept a modern scientific understanding of evolution. On the other hand, we can also try to avoid linking evolution with antireligious assertions. Evolution is compatible with many views, both non-religious and religious. E.g., dismissing antievolutionism as the result of taking the Bible seriously is equivalent to saying that people who take the Bible seriously ought to be antievolutionists. Many antievolutionists are motivated by a particular interpretation of the Bible, but then do not take the command not to lie very seriously. Conversely, taking the Bible seriously does not require believing that Genesis is written with scientific precision or scientific intent.
Although the perceived philosophical merit of any given antievolutionist will depend on the person perceiving, some aspects of antievolutionism are likely to be problematic in the eyes of most of their target audiences. For example, many antievolutionists work closely with people advocating other religious views from the ones that they purportedly defend. E.g., Carl Baugh claims to present a Christian view, yet he took part in the Hare Krishna Mysterious Origins of Man TV show. (Regarding him, it may also be helpful to note that the young-earth organization Answers in Genesis listed problems with his claims; the list is available on talk.origins). Jonathan Wells, author of Icons of Evolution and active in the Discovery Institute's "intelligent design" efforts, is ordained in the Unification Church and thus asserts that Rev. Moon is doing right what Jesus messed up, yet Wells' writing is popular with Christians. The Institute for Creation Research has been helping Harun Yahya to attack evolution in Turkey and other Muslim countries. Anyone who strongly believes in one of these religious approaches will reject the others, and thus ought to be somewhat suspicious of the claims of these antievolutionists to be defenders of the faith.
Dr. David Campbell
Old Seashells
University of Alabama
Biodiversity & Systematics
Dept. Biological Sciences
Box 870345
Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-0345 USA
bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com
That is Uncle Joe, taken in the masonic regalia of a Grand Exalted Periwinkle of the Mystic Order of Whelks-P.G. Wodehouse, Romance at Droitgate Spa
Partial index: