http://www.faithstreet.com/onfaith/2015/02/12/hey-biblical-literalists-stop-disparaging-darwin/36154
February 12, 1809 must have seemed like an ordinary day to those alive at the time, but we now know it was the day that two giants of humanity were born: Abraham Lincoln and Charles Darwin. Lincoln ended slavery in the United States in the nineteenth century, and Darwin made one of the greatest scientific discoveries of the nineteenth century. But the same people vilified both of these great men, often for the same reason: biblical literalists found scriptural reasons to promote slavery and denigrate the theory of evolution.
February 12, 1809 must have seemed like an ordinary day to those alive at the time, but we now know it was the day that two giants of humanity were born: Abraham Lincoln and Charles Darwin. Lincoln ended slavery in the United States in the nineteenth century, and Darwin made one of the greatest scientific discoveries of the nineteenth century. But the same people vilified both of these great men, often for the same reason: biblical literalists found scriptural reasons to promote slavery and denigrate the theory of evolution.
Lincoln is now revered for what he accomplished -- the humanist principle that it is morally wrong for one person to own another is commonly accepted. But moral issues are more easily understood than scientific ones, which is why so many Americans today who reject slavery still cling to a creationist worldview.
When young Charles Darwin set sail on the Beagle in 1831 he was a firm creationist. But he was open to changing his mind when he observed evidence that proved the contrary. We wouldn’t have expected pre-scientific biblical writers who lived thousands of years ago in a small corner of the Mediterranean world to have described the theory of evolution (or DNA or any discovery of modern science), and, of course, they didn’t.
However, here’s a distressing statistic: Even though we are living at a time of so many important scientific discoveries, 42 percent of Americans believe God created humans in their present form less than 10,000 years ago -- a bit of Bible-based dogma promoted by scientifically ignorant biblical literalists who disparage Charles Darwin.
Mathematicians aren’t under siege by the religious right the way evolutionary biologists are. My mathematical research area is called complex geometric function theory. Like all mathematical and scientific theories, it comes with a well-established body of facts and incomplete knowledge. If there were no unsolved problems, geometric function theory would no longer be a theory and those of us doing research in that field might move to another branch of mathematics.
So what does the theory of geometric functions have to do with the theory of evolution? Absolutely nothing -- except for the word “theory.” The religious right doesn’t find geometric function theory the least bit controversial because it bears no relationship to a biblical worldview, unlike the theory of evolution. And we know that the alleged “controversy” about evolution is religious and political, not scientific.
The religious right has waged a long and somewhat successful media campaign to persuade the public that the theory of evolution is both scientifically and morally flawed, and should be taught alongside so-called scientific creationism (or in its dressed-up form, “intelligent design”). But science is not democratic. As Anatole France said, “If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing.” Creationism should no more be taught as an alternative to the theory of evolution by natural selection than “stork theory” should be taught as an alternative to sexual reproduction. Creationism is an alternative to Zeus or Krishna, not Darwin.
Religious forces have been trying to water down science education since before the time of Darwin. We regularly hear politicians propose “Creation bills” that pressure schools to “teach the controversy,” meaning evidence for and against evolution. (Yet, we never hear protests against the theory of gravity, which is not as well established as the theory of evolution.)
In response, atheists and scientifically minded theists are joining forces to promote science and educate communities about evolution. Though both sides accept the theory of evolution, they dispute its implications. Christian evolutionists try to show the compatibility of evolution and Christianity, fearing that those who are forced to choose will dismiss evolution. Atheists, on the other hand, see evolution as incompatible with the idea that humans are a special creation by a supernatural being. The more we know about evolution, the more it becomes clear that living things, including humans, come about through a natural process, with no indication of or need for a benevolent creator.
An educated person, regardless of religious views, should understand the rudiments of the scientific method and appreciate the value of some scientific findings that conflict with their holy books. Many Christians who accept Darwinian evolution have told me that atheists and humanists don’t get angry with them the way fundamentalist Christians do. That’s understandable, because we don’t feel threatened by scientific discoveries. Though an atheist, I like the playfully deistic remark of nineteenth-century mathematician Leopold Kronecker: “God made integers, all else is the work of man.”
When I was a youngster, public schools closed on Charles Darwin’s birthday, though the official reason was to commemorate the birthday of Abraham Lincoln. Today, instead of closing schools on Darwin’s birthday, I’d like to see it become a day for students to study and explore the great scientific discoveries that continue to spring from Darwin’s work.
Communities around the country are now celebrating Darwin Day. I’m pleased that for the first time in history, both branches of Congress have introduced resolutions to recognize February 12 as Darwin Day. I want to see America become as educated and enlightened as the rest of the Western world, where even religious conservatives accept the theory of evolution, much as they came to accept the overwhelming evidence for an earlier theory that the Earth revolves around the sun. I just hope it won’t take that long.
When young Charles Darwin set sail on the Beagle in 1831 he was a firm creationist. But he was open to changing his mind when he observed evidence that proved the contrary. We wouldn’t have expected pre-scientific biblical writers who lived thousands of years ago in a small corner of the Mediterranean world to have described the theory of evolution (or DNA or any discovery of modern science), and, of course, they didn’t.
However, here’s a distressing statistic: Even though we are living at a time of so many important scientific discoveries, 42 percent of Americans believe God created humans in their present form less than 10,000 years ago -- a bit of Bible-based dogma promoted by scientifically ignorant biblical literalists who disparage Charles Darwin.
Mathematicians aren’t under siege by the religious right the way evolutionary biologists are. My mathematical research area is called complex geometric function theory. Like all mathematical and scientific theories, it comes with a well-established body of facts and incomplete knowledge. If there were no unsolved problems, geometric function theory would no longer be a theory and those of us doing research in that field might move to another branch of mathematics.
So what does the theory of geometric functions have to do with the theory of evolution? Absolutely nothing -- except for the word “theory.” The religious right doesn’t find geometric function theory the least bit controversial because it bears no relationship to a biblical worldview, unlike the theory of evolution. And we know that the alleged “controversy” about evolution is religious and political, not scientific.
The religious right has waged a long and somewhat successful media campaign to persuade the public that the theory of evolution is both scientifically and morally flawed, and should be taught alongside so-called scientific creationism (or in its dressed-up form, “intelligent design”). But science is not democratic. As Anatole France said, “If fifty million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing.” Creationism should no more be taught as an alternative to the theory of evolution by natural selection than “stork theory” should be taught as an alternative to sexual reproduction. Creationism is an alternative to Zeus or Krishna, not Darwin.
Religious forces have been trying to water down science education since before the time of Darwin. We regularly hear politicians propose “Creation bills” that pressure schools to “teach the controversy,” meaning evidence for and against evolution. (Yet, we never hear protests against the theory of gravity, which is not as well established as the theory of evolution.)
In response, atheists and scientifically minded theists are joining forces to promote science and educate communities about evolution. Though both sides accept the theory of evolution, they dispute its implications. Christian evolutionists try to show the compatibility of evolution and Christianity, fearing that those who are forced to choose will dismiss evolution. Atheists, on the other hand, see evolution as incompatible with the idea that humans are a special creation by a supernatural being. The more we know about evolution, the more it becomes clear that living things, including humans, come about through a natural process, with no indication of or need for a benevolent creator.
An educated person, regardless of religious views, should understand the rudiments of the scientific method and appreciate the value of some scientific findings that conflict with their holy books. Many Christians who accept Darwinian evolution have told me that atheists and humanists don’t get angry with them the way fundamentalist Christians do. That’s understandable, because we don’t feel threatened by scientific discoveries. Though an atheist, I like the playfully deistic remark of nineteenth-century mathematician Leopold Kronecker: “God made integers, all else is the work of man.”
When I was a youngster, public schools closed on Charles Darwin’s birthday, though the official reason was to commemorate the birthday of Abraham Lincoln. Today, instead of closing schools on Darwin’s birthday, I’d like to see it become a day for students to study and explore the great scientific discoveries that continue to spring from Darwin’s work.
Communities around the country are now celebrating Darwin Day. I’m pleased that for the first time in history, both branches of Congress have introduced resolutions to recognize February 12 as Darwin Day. I want to see America become as educated and enlightened as the rest of the Western world, where even religious conservatives accept the theory of evolution, much as they came to accept the overwhelming evidence for an earlier theory that the Earth revolves around the sun. I just hope it won’t take that long.
