Slashdot Mirror
Darwinism Must Die So Evolution Can Live
Pickens writes "MacArthur fellow Carl Safina, an adjunct professor at Stony Brook University, has an interesting essay in the NYTimes that says that equating evolution with Charles Darwin opened the door for creationism by ignoring 150 years of discoveries, including most of what scientists understand about evolution — Gregor Mendel's patterns of heredity, the discovery of DNA, developmental biology, studies documenting evolution in nature, and evolution's role in medicine and disease. Darwinism implies an ideology adhering to one man's dictates, like Marxism, says Safina. He adds that nobody talks about Newtonism or Einsteinism, and that by making Darwin 'into a sacred fetish misses the essence of his teaching.' By turning Darwin into an 'ism,' scientists created the opening for creationism, with the 'isms' implying equivalence. 'By propounding "Darwinism," even scientists and science writers perpetuate an impression that evolution is about one man, one book, one theory,' writes Safina. '"Darwinism" implies that biological scientists "believe in" Darwin's "theory." It's as if, since 1860, scientists have just ditto-headed Darwin rather than challenging and testing his ideas, or adding vast new knowledge.'"
The article is somewhat right, though I'm going to rant some on my fellow Christians who are simply fairly ignorant on the advances in scientific thought when it particularly applies to evolution. There's simply little to no education on the matter in the church walls, just as there is probably just as much misunderstanding as to how smart some theologians are and have been in the atheistic realm.
That aside, the discussion here has again devolved into a "gee, Christians sure are stupid" type debate without looking at the bigger picture. Christians ask GOOD questions that, at times, seem to have no sensical answer - such as how does anything exist, ever? How can nothing become something?
Also from this side of things, it does appear that there is a certain stance that non-theistic scientists can take that looks a LOT like faith, in discarding certain theories once disproved, yet still holding on to certain principle ideas that God cannot be behind it all. We question the thought that if science is supposed to keep all possibilities open unless disproven, then how can something be counted out? Isn't believing that God isn't out there sometimes take just as much faith as otherwise?
Is it that He's NOT out there, or we just don't want Him to be because of the consequences it may mean for our lives?