Rebecca,
Yes, the "they" in this case are the pushers of Christian philosophy as
science, largely embodied by the Discovery Institute. Sorry if that was not
clear. I do indeed consider the movement rather sinister, but that is
probably the result of my personal feelings on science and my love of my
rights as an American.
1. Actually the proof is in the testing that has been done over the past
125 years. That is what people do not understand about the topic, and the
central reason ID is not a competitor with evolution. No one is asking
anyone to take science on "faith". Science presents the evidence, and
allows it to speak for itself. If you do not think the evidence is
sufficient, and you prefer to assume intelligent design, then so be it.
Just do not call it science.
2. ID/creationism can not be disproved...it is faith. As a matter of fact,
no one is trying to disprove it. It is the other way around. Evolution is
definitely still "standing", as nothing has yet presented a substantive
alternative.
3. Then you need to start laughing. That is exactly what ID says, but not
is so few words. They believe their point of view is true because their
book says so. End of discussion(from their end anyway).
You are absolutely correct. Both science and religion are integral parts of
human society and philosophy. We need both. However, what we also need are
people who understand both, and where the dividing lines lie between them.
I do indeed hold both scientific and religious leaders in high esteem, but
leading and making positive contribution is far different from being the
one who shouts the loudest in a conversation.
Making a place for our children to be exposed to both is what we were just
talking about, and nothing is wrong with it at all. The point is that it
needs to be done in the right place, and the science/biology classroom is
not the place for both. The unscarred adults who have been exposed to both
theories were exposed in the proper places, i.e. biology class and church.
The children who may be subjected to the travesty suggested by ID
proponents will definitely scar our children, and produce an educational
blight that will be very difficult to eradicate once the mistake is made.
Indeed. We should certainly not allow the current confusion over the nature
of the topic to enter into our interpretations and color the information we
present to the public, whether they think it should be there or not.
Mark Janzen
Registrar/Collections Manager
Edwin A. Ulrich Museum of Art
Martin H. Bush Outdoor Sculpture Collection
Wichita State University
(316)978-5850
Rebecca
Fitzgerald
<rafitzgerald@COM To
CAST.NET> [log in to unmask]
Sent by: Museum cc
discussion list
<[log in to unmask] Subject
SE.LSOFT.COM> Re: A washingtonpost.com article
from: [log in to unmask]
08/03/2005 01:54
PM
Please respond to
Museum discussion
list
<[log in to unmask]
SE.LSOFT.COM>
>I like to remind people that this controversy is not about evolution or
>even science. It is about telling other people what they should believe,
>and what is right and wrong.
And this of course is the crux of most of the problems of the world. In
every debate there are those on each side who feel that they're having the
opposite view forced on them.
By the way, who are "they?" In this case is "they" an organized group
pushing ID, or the millions of people who believe that that God created the
universe and every thing in it, whether in a week, or by initiating that
moment of creation - what some folks call the "big bang." Or is "they" some
other sinister group?
Science and religion necessarily intersect in this discussion, since both
consider our origin as part of their "turf." So, after many years of
studying this debate, and reading all there is on the subject, I'm forced
to
ask:
1. Where's the proof? If science cannot produce the proof, then they're
asking me to take it on faith. Hmmm...that's exactly what religion asks
too.
2. If the authority is an evolution theory that's still standing, then I'd
have to say that no one has disproved creationism/ID yet either.
3. If either side says, "Because I'm the "illustrious grand poobah" and I
said so, well then, I'd have to laugh at their arrogance.
We hold both our scientists and our religious leaders in high esteem. Our
world is much richer for both but they both have had their dark days.
Frankly, we NEED both religion and science in our world today.
What is wrong with teaching both theories? Why not make a place in our
schools for students to be exposed to both? Virtually every adult over the
age of 45 WAS exposed to both theories - and it doesn't seem that those
generations were terribly scarred by the experience.
Bringing this back to practical museum work - it's so easy to influence
folks through museum exhibits and programming. I'm always humbled by the
vast educational influence that we wield. It is so important that we "get
it
right" and avoid bending our exhibits and interpretation to the current
politically correct viewpoint.
Becky Fitzgerald
Susquehanna Museum
=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at
http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed
information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail
message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should
read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to
[log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff
Museum-L" (without the quotes).
=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:
The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).
If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).
|
