The Deist Miasma, A Concept (Probably) Supported By Clergy

Mar 06, 2009 13:30

After writing the three parts to this (for me of little stamina) exhausting series, I decided to give it a compendium page.

Part I -- Evidence of Something Fundamentally Different
Part II -- The Tendency to Blame the Stink
Part III -- The Tenacity of Purpose

Also, making this seemingly insignificant entry gives me the opportunity to add something I would have added earlier, had I heard it early enough. I didn't. It's a talk given by the Reverend Thomas Goodhue, author of Curious Bones: Mary Anning and the Birth of Paleontology, part of a three part Darwin Day celebration podcast from Scientific American's Science Talk with Steve Mirsky.* Let me give you a taste:

More than 12,000 clergy . . . have signed a joint declaration that says, "The timeless truths of the Bible and the discoveries of modern science may comfortably coexist." An yet, for many Americans (about half of the population according to the Gallup Polls) . . . are still opposed to the theory of evolution and oppose it being taught in the public schools. That's always been a mystery to me, since it's, my whole life, practically, been clear to me it is without doubt the most important scientific theory ever presented. . . . It's almost impossible to understand the biological sciences -- or, as we've just heard, half of the other sciences these days -- without understanding the theory of evolution. Yet people are still agin' it.

. . . I think there are many reasons for this. One has to do -- and without a doubt, this is the most important reason . . . -- shortly after Darwin presented his theory, it was bastardized into something called "Social Darwinism" that had nothing to do with Darwin's scientific theory. (It) was, if anything, more of a theological or religious belief, (stating) that if you survived you were the fittest. It led to a whole series of incredibly racist theories being developed. The whole eugenics . . . movement in America that said people should be sterilized if they were poor to keep them from reproducing. Jim Crow laws across the land were supported by social Darwinism.

. . . . People sometimes talk today as if the battle was between Darwin and the fundamentalists. It really wasn't for generations. The battle was between progress Christians and the Social Darwinists. As is so often the case, movements move away from their founders and people forget that, in this case, Charles Darwin would have been horrified by things that people were saying in the name of Social Darwinism. (His) theory was inspired more by an opposition to slavery, perhaps, than anything else.

But I think, too, there's opposition to the teaching of evolution still today because far too many secular people, far too many agnostics and atheists, assume that most Christians are going to oppose them on the teaching of evolution. For Catholicism and most main-line Protestants, this really isn't a big issue. (Far) too many people who believe in the theory of evolution dismiss the possibility that people of faith could believe in theistic evolution and still be good scientists.

There's much more, and it's good stuff. Enjoy.

*By the way, of all the science-y podcasts out there, Steve does the best job of making the science interesting and entertaining without sucking the meat-and-potatoes detail out of the synopsis. Only the folks at The Skeptic's Guide to the Universe do it better; but, in all fairness, they're format is a tad different.

voodoo & woo-woo, stuff we really should be taught, unnatural selections

Previous post Next post
Up