I am glad to have read "Saving Darwin: How to Be a Christian and Believe in Evolution" by Karl Gibson. The text started by identifying the author as a fundamentalist Christian who once believed strongly in creationism. Initially I thought the text would not have a perspective useful to me (due to the fundamentalist perspective). He rejected creationism in his sophomore year in college, obtained a Ph.D. in physics and retained (most importantly) his Christianity. This text reveals a great deal about the historical and cultural factors that have been at work in elevating the false dichotomy of science (Evolution) vs. faith (Christianity).
The analogy of a gathering storm and scientific discovery struck a harmonic chord (having seen the process from time to time). "A cloud appears, here and there, in a deep blue sky. A drop of rain is felt. More clouds. More rain. The sky becomes partially, then fully obscured.....the clouds begin to break, and the sun reappears. But it is not the same sun, and everything looks different." Clearly this storm (that has brought evolution) has been with us well over a hundred years and the sun is only beginning to emerge among the those who remain steadfast in the faith.
Legal and cultural battles (particularly in the United States) are discussed in depth. The false spectacle of science versus faith in the Scopes trial (and in the trials since) are examined in depth. You can be sure that the media (consisting of those who are antithetical to small town life) went to great lengths to paint the trial as the enlightened versus those not so enlightened. Those Christians, more fully informed about the theory of evolution and who had recognize the wonder of evolution were not called by either side and not reported on. The full story is not usually revealed in these controversies and Dr. Gibson goes to great lengths to detail this fact.
The question of why these battles take place is examined. The author makes a number of observations that are related to this ongoing struggle (between creationism and evolution) in our culture. First the author points to the fact that half of the population recognizes creationism in polls as the best explanation for the state of life (on Earth). Secondly the author points to the use of evolution and natural selection to justify eugenics and murder at the largest scales in the history of mankind. The United States, in particular, has fought costly conflicts against regimes that believed in extermination of others due to race, religion and nationality. The pairing of evolution (as a guiding principle) with Marxism and Totalitarianism may be the undercurrent of resistance to adapting evolution as a valid explanation for biological species.
The author details the failure of our culture to separate the science that explains how evolution differentiates life from the wrong use of power to "accelerate" and "optimize" the evolution of the human race. This failure is at the heart, in the view of the author, of why creationism is still held so strongly by so many.
This theme (acceptance of evolution) opened up a line of personal reflection. The fact that classrooms are used to transport facts and knowledge but do not focus on students experiencing the process of science may be contribute to the resistance (of evolution). The lack of understanding about what science is may contribute to the failure in separating the scientific explanation from the wrong use of state power (or use as a philosophical model). Creationists, Socialists, Marxists and/or Nazis would all rather use "Darwinism" (or anti Darwinism fervor) rather than have students see evolution as truth formed using science that explains the complexities of emerging life forms.
I wish I could have known more, from this text, about the reason for the two dissents in the most recent "Intelligent Design Case". One dissent (by Scalia) may not be due too a belief in "Creationism". The author cites a devout Catholic faith that may have influenced his dissent. It may be more reasonable and consistent that he would oppose federal intervention in local school board matters because of the deference and limitations he thinks the court should display in such cases (and would be consistent with the someone who thinks the original intent of the constitution should impact government today). If science class was about how to obtain and analyze data to draw valid conclusions then maybe the textbook content would not be such a huge issue.
A bright spot for Catholics is found when the author reports that the Catholic Church has remained fully in support of the value of life of every individual and the right to pro-create despite being labeled as dim, criminal or wrongly conceived.
The author certainly reveals a concern about the struggle that falsely places science at odds with faith. Clearly he has good reason for concern. If those fervent in the faith fail to see truth then there are consequences for those faithful. This book is an attempt to help all of us see the truth.
The analogy of a gathering storm and scientific discovery struck a harmonic chord (having seen the process from time to time). "A cloud appears, here and there, in a deep blue sky. A drop of rain is felt. More clouds. More rain. The sky becomes partially, then fully obscured.....the clouds begin to break, and the sun reappears. But it is not the same sun, and everything looks different." Clearly this storm (that has brought evolution) has been with us well over a hundred years and the sun is only beginning to emerge among the those who remain steadfast in the faith.
Legal and cultural battles (particularly in the United States) are discussed in depth. The false spectacle of science versus faith in the Scopes trial (and in the trials since) are examined in depth. You can be sure that the media (consisting of those who are antithetical to small town life) went to great lengths to paint the trial as the enlightened versus those not so enlightened. Those Christians, more fully informed about the theory of evolution and who had recognize the wonder of evolution were not called by either side and not reported on. The full story is not usually revealed in these controversies and Dr. Gibson goes to great lengths to detail this fact.
The question of why these battles take place is examined. The author makes a number of observations that are related to this ongoing struggle (between creationism and evolution) in our culture. First the author points to the fact that half of the population recognizes creationism in polls as the best explanation for the state of life (on Earth). Secondly the author points to the use of evolution and natural selection to justify eugenics and murder at the largest scales in the history of mankind. The United States, in particular, has fought costly conflicts against regimes that believed in extermination of others due to race, religion and nationality. The pairing of evolution (as a guiding principle) with Marxism and Totalitarianism may be the undercurrent of resistance to adapting evolution as a valid explanation for biological species.
The author details the failure of our culture to separate the science that explains how evolution differentiates life from the wrong use of power to "accelerate" and "optimize" the evolution of the human race. This failure is at the heart, in the view of the author, of why creationism is still held so strongly by so many.
This theme (acceptance of evolution) opened up a line of personal reflection. The fact that classrooms are used to transport facts and knowledge but do not focus on students experiencing the process of science may be contribute to the resistance (of evolution). The lack of understanding about what science is may contribute to the failure in separating the scientific explanation from the wrong use of state power (or use as a philosophical model). Creationists, Socialists, Marxists and/or Nazis would all rather use "Darwinism" (or anti Darwinism fervor) rather than have students see evolution as truth formed using science that explains the complexities of emerging life forms.
I wish I could have known more, from this text, about the reason for the two dissents in the most recent "Intelligent Design Case". One dissent (by Scalia) may not be due too a belief in "Creationism". The author cites a devout Catholic faith that may have influenced his dissent. It may be more reasonable and consistent that he would oppose federal intervention in local school board matters because of the deference and limitations he thinks the court should display in such cases (and would be consistent with the someone who thinks the original intent of the constitution should impact government today). If science class was about how to obtain and analyze data to draw valid conclusions then maybe the textbook content would not be such a huge issue.
A bright spot for Catholics is found when the author reports that the Catholic Church has remained fully in support of the value of life of every individual and the right to pro-create despite being labeled as dim, criminal or wrongly conceived.
The author certainly reveals a concern about the struggle that falsely places science at odds with faith. Clearly he has good reason for concern. If those fervent in the faith fail to see truth then there are consequences for those faithful. This book is an attempt to help all of us see the truth.
===================================================
Please note that the views expressed here by me do not represent the views of McGill-Toolen Catholic High School, Archdiocese of Mobile or any part of the Universal Catholic Church.
