Greg Easterbrook, on Beliefnet, does the old Intelligent Creation repetition, right down to trotting out the slogan teach the controversy:
But then, just as in 1925 opposition to natural selection was not really about the theory but about sustaining a status quo in which people were not supposed to question clergy, so today's evolutionary fundamentalism is not so much about the theory but about sustaining a new status quo in which people are not supposed to question scientists. Yet this discourages students from engaging in one of the most fascinating--if not the most fascinating--of questions: Why are we here?
The most fascinating question that comes to my mind while reading this paragraph would be if Easterbrook needs directions to the philosophy department, where he would find why's aplenty.
More interestingly, it displays an equation (clergy=scientists) that seems to have been making the rounds among American Intelligent-Creationists: science is just another form of dogma. So it doesn't matter if the dogma is scientific or religious, and they should have equal weight.
1 comment:
This IS the latest line of attack. I agree.
It starts with: They are all beliefs, therefore as beliefs they each have equal value, weight and credibility.
And progress to: Science is a religion which requires faith, and therefore christianity which is also a religion and has the same value as any other religion (including science) should be considered to be just as plausible.
This is the present method of attack. It requires theists to rewrite several dictionaries and encyclopedias, but when has that ever stopped them..
Post a Comment