Old Posts

2 months ago Reshared post from Alireza Yavari Most Creative & Beloved Street Art Photos - Source: streetar...
November 30, 2011
2 months ago +Erik Kristensen, you'll enjoy this especially. But so will everyone else.
November 22, 2011
2 months ago Diary of early morning into late morning the day #ows was evicted from Zuccotti Park
November 20, 2011
2 months ago Eviction Night into the Morning
November 18, 2011
3 months ago Effective
November 2, 2011
3 months ago If you're in the unfortunate minority of people who trust in reason, you're shit out of luck so l...
November 2, 2011
3 months ago by the numbers article on the NLG's presence at #ows, I was interviewed for this but didn't provi...
October 29, 2011

Making No Sense in Defense of Nonsense

Dr. Gerry Lower at Axis of Logic makes so much sense today that he probably requires a warning sticker on his forehead declaring as much. In reviewing the current push towards ‘stickering’ grade school science text books with warnings that evolution is only a ‘theory’, Lower makes the case that the Creationists simply don’t deserve to voice opposition to a theory that they can’t or haven’t or won’t bother to counter. Lower also points out that the Creationists are playing semantic games – scientific ‘fact’ doesn’t exist per se, by its very own rules of construction, and so everything is, in essence, a theory. But while Evolution is a theory backed by reams of undisputed, empirical evidence, ‘Intelligent Design’ is not even a theory.

Legal council for the Atlanta school district said that the “warning” stickers on biology textbooks were meant to “encourage critical thinking.” This again is an argument that makes no sense in defense of nonsense. Critical thinking requires, after all, knowing something about the relationships between ideas, facts, hypotheses and theories. Critical thinking requires, after all, knowing something about natural philosophy and its historic American role in overcoming religious despotism two centuries ago.
There is and can be no intelligent or meaningful compromise between science and religion on this issue. As with arguments over the motions of the planets and the causes of human disease, ultimately one side will be accepted, i.e., “proven,” and one side will be rejected as being inadequate to the job at hand. Creationism will be kindly requested to take its religion back home where it belonged all along in a democracy guaranteeing religious freedom. Its very presence in governmental and academic deliberations is an affront to the separation of church and state.
After all the idle debate, it comes down to a matter of human self-concept. The real issue here is whether we, as a people, ought base our views of life on supernatural conjecture (to become transcendentalists, supernaturalists and self-righteous fundamentalists) or on empirical reality (to become empiricists, realists, and thoughtful, caring, responsible citizens). In the end, the choice is ours, to have a view of life based on faith in faith itself or a view of life based on what we know and what we care about.

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

* Copy this password:

* Type or paste password here:

3,758 Spam Comments Blocked so far by Spam Free Wordpress

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>