Shouldn't biology teachers and textbooks stick with science and leave metaphysical statements--especially statements implying or promoting atheism--out of the classroom? I have made a constitutional argument that they must, and some leading Christian groups are now reviewing this strategy. Meanwhile, atheists on this blog and elsewhere noisily contend that there is no problem, and that no one is peddling atheism in the name of science.
In this context it's instructive to review a controversy generated several years ago by the National Association of Biology Teachers (NABT) when the group decided to remove the words "impersonal" and "unsupervised" from its position statement on the teaching of evolution. The NABT is a membership organization of thousands of teachers at the elementary, secondary and college levels. It has been in the forefront of legal battles against "creation science" and "intelligent design."
The original statement said, "The diversity of life on earth is the result of evolution: an unsupervised, impersonal, unpredictable and natural process of temporal descent with genetic modification that is affected by natural selection, historical contengencies, and changing environments." And there it is: the official statement of the largest pro-evolution group of teachers smuggling metaphysical atheism into a scientific claim about evolution. Let's remember that this metaphysical pronouncement appears in an instruction manual for science teachers nationwide. So much for atheist ideologues who say that this is not an issue for anyone to worry about.
Two thoughtful academics, philosopher Alvin Plantinga and theologian Huston Smith, noticed the problem and wrote the NABT. They pointed out that the vast majority of Americans believe that a personal agent, God, is responsible for both the universe and for life. What Christians object to is not the idea that the earth is old or that one life form has evolved into another; what they object to is the insinuation, using the authority of science, that Gd does not exist and that material reality is all that there is.
Plantinga and Huston noted that terms like "impersonal" and "unsupervised" are not scientific terms. "It is extremely hard to see how an empirical science such as biology could address such a theological question as whether a process like evolution is or isn't directed by God. How could an empirical inquiry possibly show that God was not guiding and directing evolution?"
The NABT board found the argument persuasive, and decided to drop the two unscientific terms from its statement. At this point, a group of atheists, led by one Massimo Pigliucci, filed an open letter with more than 100 signatures accusing the NABT of bowing to religious pressure. But Eugenie Scott, writing on behalf of the NABT, pointed out that the NABT's decision was scientific and not political. Scott noted that making metaphysical claims about God's existence or nonexistence "is venturing outside of what science can tell us."
Atheists who were hoping to use the battering ram of evolution to attack religion were bitterly disappointed by this outcome. But this was one small episode: I'd like to see a coordinated strategy over the next several years to increase their dismay. Imagine the apoplexy in the God-hating camp if courts rule that atheist interpretations of evolution by scientists such as Richard Dawkins, William Provine, Steven Pinker, Douglas Futuyma and others have no place in the biology classroom! When atheism is the loser, science is the winner.
Reader Comments ( Page 5 of 43)
61. FL Chick, it's a leap frequently taken. Perhaps we should give it a name, like the D'Souza Conclusion.
brian- couldn't help but see your ALL CAPS post about the Bible being America's "favorite" book. What source is this from? What data did they use? What creates the definition of favorite? Was it a question in the 2000 census that I didn't see? Was it number of copies sold? If so, did they eliminate such items as the Gideons, or is it horribly skewed?
My mom used to read me the Bible when I was young. She did it every night. To help me sleep. Worked every time. I guess in that sense it might be my favorite book?
Strados at 11:31AM on Apr 9th 2008
62. Oi vey... here we go again with all this nonsense. Pointing out how wrong DD is has just become tiresome. It's worth it to see the fundies get all riled up. Especially whoever it was that said there is no scientific evidence to support evolution... I'd like to know where they got their degree. I'm pretty sure that any information on evolution that Christians get comes from their scientifically inept preacher. What the hell does a preacher know about science?? Their profession the exact opposite, and I can guarantee they didn't study it going to bible college. Christians can never get any information from any reliable source, because in their mind everything not sold at Bob's Christian Bookstore is propaganda aimed at destroying religion and morals.
Sure, it's easy to laugh at these people, but I also pity them because they are so, so lost.
Hey, Christians... since you don't trust science, why are you even going to hospitals? Getting surgeries? Getting prescription drugs and glasses? I thought god was supposed to look out for y'all. I'd LOVE to find the stats for the success rates for REAL medical science vs. praying, but it wouldn't change anything. Arguing with a fundie Christian is arguing with a brick wall, only dumber.
K at 11:33AM on Apr 9th 2008
63. Atheists,
Some of the greatest scientists in history believed in God. You should know that, if you're as smart as you say you are. You are also right that many theologies have indoctrinated the faithful. I would go one step further by saying that atheists have been indoctrinated by science. You can continue to use your sesquipidalian words to try and impress the faithful, but it doesn't make you seem any more intelligent. I am a legal guardian to a mentally handicapped individual. I took full custody after her parents died in a car accident. I'll be doing various chores around the house when I hear her talking to someone. I'll go and check on her and she's sitting there by herself. She'll look up and smile at me as if she's privy to some inside joke. She makes me feel dumb. The Native Americans have always regarded these people as blessings because they can communicate with spirits. I think the biggest fault with atheism is that they can't prove anything, and when asked to do so, they'll give you a political response by turning it around. If we were living in a flat world, and I were to tell you that the world was round; wouldn't you want proof. I think atheism as a whole has issues with the church, and also how theology can make people do relatively anything. I can't possibly imagine why anyone would want to believe there isn't a God, but if you think you're smarter than the rest of us, then prove it. That's my issue with atheism.
MrWiteKES at 11:36AM on Apr 9th 2008
64. Lloyd- I like that quote..."The Glory of God is intelligence." If I weren't in a public school I'd probably put it up in my classroom.
Strados at 11:33AM on Apr 9th 2008
65. Mr. Wite- Indeed, my issues are with churches. I won't speak for Botts but I'm pretty sure he'll say he prefers the personal relationship to God, rathar than relating to somebody who claims to relate to God. And then being told what to do, how to worship, and what to believe.
But that's not atheism. Not sure if there's a specific name for it? Achurchism?
Strados at 11:46AM on Apr 9th 2008
66. ryan,
notice there are no fairy tales. if the bible were not true it would have been discarded long before now. try as you may,you cannot use science to further your agenda of denying god,which is exactly what the atheist agenda is.
brian at 11:50AM on Apr 9th 2008
67. Um, brian... what do you mean by 'notice there are no fairy tales'? Walk into any bookstore and you will find collections of the Brothers Grimm fairy tales, Hans Christian Anderson, and others. Those are not true, and they're still around. In fact, I have both of the collections mentioned on my bookshelf right now. In fact, Anderson's 'The Little Mermaid' was made into a movie by Disney.
Try as you may, you can not use logic and reason to make you sound crediable to anyone with enough intelligence to tie their shoes.
K at 12:10PM on Apr 9th 2008
68. MrWiteKES,
It's spelled sesquipedalian. Make sure you aren't confusing God with religion. Many of these scientists that believed in "God" were either nonreligious, or forced to make themselves seem religious.
Mokele Mbembe at 12:12PM on Apr 9th 2008
69. MrWiteKES,
Prove god.
Not with the bible, use logic to prove god.
mac at 12:19PM on Apr 9th 2008
70. brian,
if the Koran were not true it would have been discarded long before now.
if the Triptaka were not true it would have been discarded long before now.
if the Sruti were not true it would have been discarded long before now.
if the Kojiki were not true it would have been discarded long before now.
if the Daozang were not true it would have been discarded long before now.
if the Dianetics were not true it would have - scratch that one.
Mokele Mbembe at 12:19PM on Apr 9th 2008
71. Interesting. Calling Somber's post "spewing vitriolic" and calling Somber's post "campy read"?
That post shows how Rand's bias permeates his reading of Somber's writing, which, buy the way, is excellent, well though out prose.
Mommie Dearest?
If you don't agree with the content or opinion of a post, fine.
Attaching a derisive, patronizing and demeaning evaluation simply demonstrates the poster's lack of reading skills and objectivity.
I try to read each post (except brian little b's) with dispassion and objectivity to assess the "truth" of the content and substance.
Rand's critical skills suck badly.
Linda at 12:30PM on Apr 9th 2008
72. Mokele,
Thanks for the spelling correction. I see you didn't really gain any insight from my post. Einstein couldn't tie his shoes...Thelonius
Monk needed directions home every night...Descarte was a human clock...Tell me something...What is intelligence without wisdom?
Mac- You responded how I said you would. Does that make me a prophet?
MrWiteKES at 12:32PM on Apr 9th 2008
73. I'm pretty sure that brian consults his copy of '101 Ways to Make Asinine Arguments' before he posts anything.
K at 12:34PM on Apr 9th 2008
74. MrWiteKES,
Where is the insight in your last post? It takes wisdom to tie your shoes?
Mokele Mbembe at 12:38PM on Apr 9th 2008
75. Mr,
If you are implying brian has wisdom... well, I just couldn't take anything you say seriously. Even if you can agree with brian soley because you worship the same sky daddy, you have to at least acknowledge that on every other subject he has no fucking clue what he's talking about.
"I can't possibly imagine why anyone would want to believe there isn't a God..."
Well, I can't possibly imagine why anyone would want to believe there is a God simply to quiet a fear of death, or just to have something to believe in (a safety blanket for adults)... or to have an excuse to hate homosexuals, Jews, and just about everyone else. I don't understand why any rational adult would want to believe in a god 'just because.'
K at 12:42PM on Apr 9th 2008