Evolution-Creation Controversy
Download
Report
Transcript Evolution-Creation Controversy
Robert Root-Bernstein and
Donald L. McEachron
in Applying Anthropology
(2012:6-14)
Difference between “I have a
theory” and a scientific theory
Test or observe
Evidence, testability
Correctable
Tentative
“The conclusions reached by science are
only contingent truths” (8)
Productive of new knowledge & hypotheses
What ideas fit as scientific theory?
Evolution
Creationism
Observable
Yes--mechanism of natural
selection
Fossil
Genetic
But not as a replay
Correctable
Modified although overall
theory supported
Productive
Yes: Generates new
hypotheses
Observable
No—not then, not now
Correctable
No—Celebrates
unchanging ideas
Productive
“unobservable, untestable,
uncorrectable creator” (12)
bounded & unbounded (8-9)
God’s will (unbounded) can’t be
tested
Unbounded: can explain
anything
Bounded: must be limited in
order to be a scientific
explanation
How does “Teaching Theories”
portray relation of evolutionary
theory and creation belief?
Different domains
Theory and belief, totally different
explanations
Creationism should be taught
In religion class
“Teaching Theories” is ©1982
Add genetic evidence and
Glorified view of science,
computing power
but example is evolving
Best adapted—in a
pests
particular environment (9) The idea of different
Fittest—in a specific
domains, entirely
environment (10)
separating theory from
Not just simple complex
belief, may be too tidy
Sometimes complex
Science makes us
simple
“humbly aware” (13) but
their over-simplifications
No directional arrow of
can seem arrogant
evolution
Benjamin Z. Freed
in Applying Anthropology
(2012:15-20)
Today, fewer “Creationists”—but
might talk about “Intelligent Design”
Central Claim: It’s too complex!
Must be a design
and a Designer
Stickers: “Theory, not a fact”
Evolution is not about the origin of life
Singles out evolution—consider atomic theory or theory
of gravity
Misunderstands scientific theory
Intelligent Design: No testable hypotheses (Freed: 17)
Science is not a monolith
Evolution shows “so-called irreducibly complex
structures can evolve from non-irreducible
complexity” (17)
Difference between “let’s have a
debate” and a scientific debate
• Not necessarily two sides; differing positions
• Different evidence or interpretations
• Ideally results in convergence or modification
• Often prompts return to empirical evidence
• Good example is Homo floresiensis (LS:23)
• competing hypotheses measured by
evidence
It’s not a question of whether or
not students and teachers believe
in evolution. Scientists don’t
believe in it; they accept this
overarching scientific theory.
--Freed in Applying Anthropology
(2012:19)
Lavenda & Schultz, Module 1
Trickier?
Compare Desana creation story and science
(LS:19)
Both equally myths and stories = say
something about world, make life meaningful
In the anthropological use of myth
BUT – scientific stories must be compared to
evidence and scrutiny (LS:20)
Must be rejected if they don’t fit (LS:21)
The Interplanetary Aliens Hypothesis (LS:24)
May not ever be definitively disproved, but without
evidence it “holds no scientific interest”
Lavenda & Schultz, Module 1
Gentler?
We may be able to move, as philosopher
of science Philip Kitcher urges, “beyond
the simple opposition of proof and faith.
. . . Between these extremes lies the vast
field of cases in which we believe
something on the basis of good—even
excellent—but inconclusive evidence”
(1982, 34). (LS:26).