Sometimes I am asked why it is that I devote so much of my time to promoting evolution and attacking the certifiable lunacy that is young-earth creationism. Surely I have better things to do with my time, it is implied, like read Charles Dickens or plant flowers; after all, people believe lots of crazy things, why not let them have them, especially when it does no harm? That, however, is where the person asking the question goes astray. Creationism does do harm, real and verifiable harm. It is not harmless, like the belief that Elvis lives or the idea that Bigfoot strolls somewhere in the western United States. It is not a question of my opinion versus yours, not when the truth of evolution is verified scientific fact.
At its heart, the struggle between creationism and evolution isn’t about a battle of ideas, for evolution is far more than just an idea. It isn’t even a struggle between religion and irreligion, though the young earth creationists might like you to think that, for many people of faith happily accept the veracity of evolution. The real heart of the issue is authority versus inquiry. Belief in creationism is belief in authority; not the authority of scientists, trained for years in the discipline, but in the authority of a minority interpretation of an ancient book. Why should one accept creationism? Because a fundamentalist interpretation of Genesis demands that you do so, forces you to disregard all evidence to the contrary, to ignore the mountain of data that speaks for evolution, data that does not testify to a six-day Creation event or a global Flood.
Creationism demands the suspension of inquiry, demands that you accept it because the pastor or the Answers in Genesis speaker tells you to (though they will say it is not they but God who commands you to accept their interpretation of events). Creationism wants you to stop questioning and stop thinking. In a world increasingly driven by science and science-based technology, where rational decisions based on facts are imperative, this is nothing short of a recipe for disaster. On the contrary, science is all about asking questions and seeking their answers, if they are to be found. It is this spirit of inquiry, not blind obedience to authority, that must rule the day. If scientists and members of the educated public hadn’t asked questions, where would we be? Would we still accept disease as punishment from God rather than something to be studied and treated? Would we see earthquakes as a sign to repent rather than an understandable part of nature?
Blind obedience to authority has led us astray so often in the past. Let us consign this to the dustbin of history, a relic from a darker time. Appeals to authority have no place in science, and it is science that has made so much of our modern world possible. Blind obedience to authority is the direct path to stagnation, not progress. If we are to move forward, it will only be with inquiry.
At its heart, the struggle between creationism and evolution isn’t about a battle of ideas, for evolution is far more than just an idea. It isn’t even a struggle between religion and irreligion, though the young earth creationists might like you to think that, for many people of faith happily accept the veracity of evolution. The real heart of the issue is authority versus inquiry. Belief in creationism is belief in authority; not the authority of scientists, trained for years in the discipline, but in the authority of a minority interpretation of an ancient book. Why should one accept creationism? Because a fundamentalist interpretation of Genesis demands that you do so, forces you to disregard all evidence to the contrary, to ignore the mountain of data that speaks for evolution, data that does not testify to a six-day Creation event or a global Flood.
Creationism demands the suspension of inquiry, demands that you accept it because the pastor or the Answers in Genesis speaker tells you to (though they will say it is not they but God who commands you to accept their interpretation of events). Creationism wants you to stop questioning and stop thinking. In a world increasingly driven by science and science-based technology, where rational decisions based on facts are imperative, this is nothing short of a recipe for disaster. On the contrary, science is all about asking questions and seeking their answers, if they are to be found. It is this spirit of inquiry, not blind obedience to authority, that must rule the day. If scientists and members of the educated public hadn’t asked questions, where would we be? Would we still accept disease as punishment from God rather than something to be studied and treated? Would we see earthquakes as a sign to repent rather than an understandable part of nature?
Blind obedience to authority has led us astray so often in the past. Let us consign this to the dustbin of history, a relic from a darker time. Appeals to authority have no place in science, and it is science that has made so much of our modern world possible. Blind obedience to authority is the direct path to stagnation, not progress. If we are to move forward, it will only be with inquiry.
Huzzah!
ReplyDeleteI'm sure you realize that the Founding Fathers of science were creationists, including Sir Issac Newton. Their view on origins did not hinder their scientific prowess nor their ability to be rational and intellectual. Not even a doctor performing surgery has need of the origin theory of evolution. Evolution is just as much a religion as creation. Think about it.
ReplyDeleteAnd I'm sure an intelligent person like you realizes that Newton lived long before Darwin did; your point is moot. Aristotle, a giant of science, also believed the sun revolved around the earth. Are you then going to argue that the geocentric model of the solar system has merit? Evolution is based on evidence, not faith, which is more than can be said for the fairy-tale of young-earth creationism.
ReplyDelete