Everything That Is The Case
I just read Why Darwin Matters: The Case Against Intelligent Design by Michael Shermer. Shermer, whom I've met, was an Evangelical creationist until he saw the light (i.e., started studying science). Shermer publishes Skeptic, a periodical that examines pseudoscience, and regularly debates Intelligent Design proponents, so this book is right up his alley.
Why Darwin Matters is more a survey than an in-depth work, discussing the highlights of the "debate" between evolution and creationism. As such, it's a useful introduction to the controversy, but not much more. And the subtitle, not the title, is really the subject of the book.
The most intriguing section was when Shermer stopped talking about the scientific aspects of the debate (which are widely available elsewhere) and asked if religion and evolution can coexist. He believes so, and devotes a full chapter to "Why Christians and Conservatives Should Accept Evolution."
I'm not sure it's that easy. For millions, the question is actually trivial, and the answer is no. If you're a Young Earth Creationist, for example, you must reject Darwin. But for many others, there's still a struggle. I don't deny quite a few have been able to reconcile modern science and ancient religion, but as long as faith makes any claims about factual matters, there's a chance it'll butt up against scientific discoveries.
Some, including Shermer, say religion and science can't contradict each other. The only way to manage this trick is to definitionally declare they cover different areas. While this might work for some, it has not been historically true. Others go even further, stating "my religion can't be contradicted by the truth." I don't understand this claim. Either it means you're willing to change your religion when new facts are discovered, or you believe you've got an unfalsifiable belief no matter what set of facts exist. Doesn't it make more sense to say "I believe my religion is true, but I'm willing to change my mind if new facts come to light"?
3 Comments:
It must be that religion trumps science by asserting that the scientific method and discovering facts are not the the truth but just an imperfect man-made tool to approach truth. Of course this is a position that can never be assailed by mere logic and anyone from the Pope to to the Grand Ayatollah to Sidney Omarr can state it just as fervently.
Are there really millions of "young earthers"? I always thought that was a fringe edge of Christianity. Or does Islam teach a "young earth" as well (that would add up to millions fast).
If you'll re-read that paragraph, you'll see I don't say there are millions of Young Earthers. On the other hand, I don't know how many there are and I wouldn't be surprised if the number is in the millions.
Post a Comment
<< Home