Just to clarify my last posting, I should mention that the link that I gave
for Great Awakenings is from a site that uses 'wiki.' The reason I chose
it was because it has the best multilingual component. If you want to read
more in-depth essays on the Great Awakening, a good site, although entirely in
English, is hosted by TeacherServ and the National Humanities Center at: http://www.nhc.rtp.nc.us/tserve/eighteen/ekeyinfo/grawaken.htm
This site goes into far more detail, but essentially says the same thing,
minus the periodicity argument, which, by the way, I was poking fun at, just so
people don't think I'm mad. I do think that these Awakenings in America
come in waves, but periodicity is not really something that I see in them.
Cyclicity, yes, but periodicity, not really.
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From:
paleonet-owner@nhm.ac.uk on behalf of Park,Lisa E
Sent:
Fri 1/28/2005 5:58 PM
To: paleonet@nhm.ac.uk; paleonet@nhm.ac.uk
Cc:
Subject: paleonet periodicity and religious
revivals?
I think that religion in America is different from other countries
because we do not have an official state religion. Historically this has
allowed the development of a lot of different religions, such as the
Methodists, Baptists, LDS, and Seventh Day Adventists. I suppose they
were filling "empty niche space," if you will. The fact that the Great
Awakenings have an approximate 80 year periodicity is quite bizarre to me
(First Awakening 1730-1740; Second Awakening 1820-1830s; Third Awakening
1886-1908; Fourth Awakening 1960-present?). After these revivals,
where, in most cases, they return to more primitive beliefs, they
tend to split into factions and the end members go 'extinct' and the 'adaptive
peak' survives. Sometimes, I think that it is very tempting to apply
macroevolutionary principles to this! But........ is it a punctuated or
gradualistic model? Are we in steady-state equilibrium or increasing
diversity? (just kidding, of course)
I suppose it might be a small comfort to know that these movements only
last approximately 40 years; so, it would appear that we have about 5 more to
go with this one (The Fourth). The odd thing that I've noticed is that a
big war often follows each one (i.e. American Revolution, American Civil War,
WWI and WWII). However, my political science colleagues assure me that
there is no direct correlation between Awakenings and wars.
Lisa Park
-----Original Message-----
From:
paleonet-owner@nhm.ac.uk on behalf of Peter Roopnarine
Sent: Thu 1/27/2005 3:01 PM
To: paleonet@nhm.ac.uk
Cc:
Subject: Re: paleonet NYTimes editorial on
Creationism
Practicing physicians in the US _must_ have a MD
degree, or some equivalent
(e.g. DPM). The Ph.D. does not count. Ph.D.'s
in medicine are reserved for
medical research, though most Ph.D.s in
medicine generally also hold a MD
degree (most programs that offer the
Ph.D. offer it jointly with the MD).
And I have to say that, having
some familiarity with those programs, that the
quality of research
mentoring offered in the medical Ph.D. programs is in no
way less than
what is expected in other scientific disciplines. A
dissertation is
produced, and active research and publication is expected.
Look,
ID and other creationists who hold advanced degrees in science do
not
hold their beliefs because they received insufficient training or
anything
like that. They are religious fundamentalists, and they
interpret everything
in the world around them in that light (no pun
intended). I have personally
known two geologists who received Ph.D.s
from two of the top 10 Geology
programs in the country, and yet are
creationists. Smart enough to get the
degree, but no, not smart enough to
be good scientists.
I agree with the emphasis that has been placed
on the role of history in
this debate. Unfortunately, that is a point
that is quite often highlighted
by creationists, precisely because it is
a soft spot in the framework of
evolutionary theory. There are no "tests"
of evolution, in the Popperian
sense, to be had from the geological
record. There is inference only. I am a
strong proponent of inferential
science, and there is nothing preventing
predictive hypotheses being
generated from observations based on the fossil
record. But
_strong_ tests are in the neontological domain. _Understanding_
the
history of life, and the current state, does indeed require history,
but
remember, it does have a significant interpretive component. Our deep
time
science also differs from that of the physicists in one very
important and
fundamental way. Physicists can theoretically, and quite
often in practice,
reverse time. They do it all the time when they study
conditions of the early
Universe in particle accelerators. We can't do
that. But we do have a record,
and it is, in my opinion at least, most
consistent with evolutionary theory
and the Modern
Synthesis.
Peter
--
Dr. Peter D. Roopnarine, Assoc.
Curator
Department of Invertebrate Zoology & Geology
California
Academy of Sciences
875 Howard St.
San Francisco CA
94103
Phone: (415) 321-8271
FAX: (415) 321-8615
WWW: http://www.calacademy.org/research/izg/roopnarine/peter.htm
No
more wars please
|