Posts Tagged ‘Oxford’

Lies, Damn Lies, and Creationism – Redux

Tuesday, February 10th, 2009

Book Review- Monkey Girl, by Edward Humes

Book review by L.Grey, with permission.

In the time of Galileo it was argued that the texts, ‘And the sun stood still … and hasted not to go down about a whole day’ (Joshua x. 13) and ‘He laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not move at any time’ (Psalm cv. 5) were an adequate refutation of the Copernican theory.

Alan Turing, Computing Machinery and Intelligence, Mind 59 (1950), 443.

Monkey Girl by Edward Humes ISBN: 9780060885489, ISBN10: 0060885483 Ecco (imprint of Harper Collins) Hardcover 400 pages, $25.95

What does it mean when proponents of Intelligent Design say “teach the controversy”?

You may think you know what the controversy is about, but you’ll never get a more thorough and up-to-date analysis of the Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District trial than Edward Humes’ book Monkey Girl. The 2005 trial was one of the latest episodes of the seemingly never-ending struggle for the hearts and minds of public school students. This is a fight between those who feel that Science describes nature pretty well, and those who believe that anything other than a strict literal interpretation of the Bible deserves a trip to hell and excommunication from polite society. The trial itself was a gripping account of small-town drama unfolding over the course of a year, of parents and children enduring intimidation and humiliation. Witnesses from both sides turned the courtroom into a fascinating arena of scientific evidence versus faith dressed in science’s clothing. At least three books have come out of the case (see further reading below for details), and Ed Humes’ Pulitzer Prize-winning writing style and even-handed coverage make Monkey Girl a compelling choice. Humes not only covers the case, he describes the town as the trial transforms it:

Dover sits firmly astride the front lines of America’s culture war, occupying the uneasy space between America’s religious faith and its longstanding fondness for scientific progress, between an idealized past and an uncertain future, between education and indoctrination, between the natural and the supernatural. For the next several months, the ninth floor courtroom in the Ronald Reagan Federal Building will belong to Kitzmiller et al versus Dover Area School District, an unintentionally epic lawsuit filed by a group of parents against their evolution-doubting school board. The case does indeed have much in common with the 1925 Scopes Monkey trial, a public spectacle in which Clarence Darrow and the American Civil Liberties Union unsuccessfully challenged a Tennessee law banning the teaching of evolution. But unlike its illustrious predecessor (which, popular imagination and classic films notwithstanding, had exactly no impact on the law or educational practice at the time), the Dover case is positioned to define (or redefine) for decades just what children are taught about where we come from. [prologue, Monkey Girl]

The controversy has shifted a bit since the famous 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial, which first questioned the legality of teaching Darwin’s theory of Evolution in public schools. World War II and the Cold War demanded that the United States produce competent scientists. This demand seemed to effectively muzzle fundamentalists for a few decades. High School Biology classes approaching the Theory of Evolution would often involve an uneasy truce involving the words “changes over time” and neatly sidestepping the origins of life. Until reading this book, I assumed that all but the most extreme religious fundamentalists were fine with this truce. Humes’ book shows precisely how much this has changed.

While the book mostly focuses on the Dover trial, Humes also takes us to a similar trial in Kansas, the controversy involving the gift shop at the Grand Canyon, where Creationists have had some success in censoring information about the geological age of the national monument. Most importantly, Humes follows the trail of intellectual and legal deception to the pseudo-scientific think-tank called The Discovery Institute, a group of scientists who exclude any scientific evidence in conflict with Christian Scripture.

The Dover Trial is full of drama and bad debate, A Scopes Monkey Trial for the 21st century, or Inherit the Wind, Redux. Humes shows in the Dover case how Creationism in public schools, having been defeated in courts during the late 20th century under the Separation of Church and State clause of the First Amendment, evolved (pun intended) into the virtually identical Intelligent Design movement, to Dover, Pennsylvania among other places. Some of the most shocking moments of the trial feature the ironic displays of dishonesty which ultimately brought down the school board members who were trying to bring religion into the local biology classrooms. Humes covers the scope of the grand scheme of religious activists, who plan on infusing not only science classes with Christian dogma and bias, but History, Government, and other classes as well.

This very book elicits criticism from those whose definition of “Fair and Balanced” have been warped to Orwellian proportions by Fox News and today’s most hyperbolic propagandists. Humes compassionately portrays how the plaintiffs’ religious beliefs in this case, were attacked and their children mocked at school out of ignorance. The Dover case pitted one kind of Christians against another. Those who favored the separation of Church and State were attacked as “not Christian enough”, in a great example of how the separation of these two functions protects freedom of religion. Another surprising turn of events showed how the presiding judge, a Bush-supporting Republican was branded as a liberal judicial activist for defending the constitution.

While it is clear on which side Humes’ sympathies lie, the reader is necessarily confronted with the heart of the so-called controversy: regarding extreme religious views which by definition do not tolerate any opposing views, what are the limits of tolerance in society? How can a democracy defend pluralism from those whose religious beliefs clash so vehemently with the definition of reality itself by the rest of the world, both secular and religious? The Framers of the Constitution were historically not far away from centuries of religious wars in Europe which constantly threw governments into turmoil. They saw the value of the separation of church and state to both church and state. Back in those days religious persecution meant death or incarceration because of one’s beliefs, not what passes for persecution these days in the minds of some.

One gets the strong impression reading Humes’ insightful analysis, that this latest version of the old Darwin-vs.-God controversy is the product of the removal of Critical Thinking skills from the mainstream public school curriculum, and the lack of a Cold War Era push towards developments in Math & Science, supported by all but the most outspoken of Bible literalists, who constantly attempt to couch the debate as “God vs. Darwin”, when in fact, most religions don’t require people to choose between the two. In my opinion, this is a clear case of the old adage, “Those who ignore history are condemned to repeat it”. Young-Earth Creationists might benefit from not ignoring the history of the Catholic Church’s censorship of Copernicus and Galileo hundreds of years ago, and ask themselves why the Pope doesn’t have a big problem with Darwin’s theories today.

-Philadelphic

Further reading on the Dover Trial: (after the break…)
(more…)

Carnival of the Godless #91

Sunday, May 11th, 2008

Welcome to the 91st Edition of the Carnival of the Godless! This is my deflowering, so please don’t be too harsh! I’m fortunate to have hosted a selected article in an earlier Carnival, and I think the Carnival is one of the best things to happen to the rational community since the passing of the International Rationalist Rights Law.

What? There’s no International Rationalist Rights Law? Damnit, we gotta work on that.

Anyway, there is no particular order to the list that follows, and I’ve refrained from indicating the system of selection. I will let you know, however, that the majority of submissions that didn’t make it failed to meet the COTG guidelines (and I’m fairly flexible with those). The included articles are certainly an interesting and often informative read, and I hope you enjoy and give these authors (and their hosts, if different) a round of virtual applause for standing up for rationality and trying to spread the word through their writing.

Without further blabbering, let the Carnival begin!

The Theistic Me vs The Atheistic Me
The Chaplain from The Apostate’s Chapel questions the value of a theistic mindset.

What does the atheistic you miss, if anything, about the theistic you?
My initial, knee-jerk reaction to this question was, “Absolutely nothing.”

Prayer and Disc Golf
Jeremy from Endcycle compares prayer to social expression.

“Yeah, Jeremy, it’s harmless and pointless.. just like prayer, right?”

Oh.
I get it.
See, he’s making a jab at my pretty staunchly “screw your prayers” atheist position. I ranted at him a bit about how my yelling at a disc isn’t quite like people withholding medicines from a dying child and felt vaguely superior about myself for a moment or 3.

Moral Relativism and Why I do not Embrace it
Divided by Zero refuses to accept moral relativism. Find out why.

[H]istory has shown us that all moral values that we accept in the western society are the result of such processes. A merciless war of ideas where only the ones that were competitively superior could survive. I cannot bring myself to call this process objective for I truly do not see it as such.

Debunking Christianity 25: The Ignorance of Evil
Anath from The Antichristian Phenomenon examines the concept of Evil throughout time, from Plato to Nietzsche.

“[O]bedience”, “selflessness”, and “respect” are labeled as “good” while “violence,” “Anything Non-Christian,” and “nonconformists” are labeled “evil”.

SIWOTI: Someone is Wrong on the Internet
B.T. Murtagh from quarkscrew provides a concise rebuttal to the “Christian Nation” assertion.

Several insisted that the wall of separation between Church and State wasn’t intended to apply to Christianity – in one case while making a big point out of the fact that the phrase doesn’t actually appear in the Constitution. That’s true, if irrelevant: the phrase actually comes from a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association, praising the anti-Establishment Clauses of the First Amendment.

“Self Evidence”: Truth or Truthiness?
At Five Public Opinions, AV questions whether certain moral propositions need justification.

Frankly, I don’t like arguments from self-evidence, and I think we should be very careful with them. In logic they might be OK: “it is self-evident that all bachelors are unmarried,” and so forth. In ethics, appeals to self-evidence seem to me to constitute little more than arrogant presumptiousness on the part of those making them.

Frustration
DagoodS from Thoughts From a Sandwich criticizes a common double standard (hosted by The Barefoot Bum).

It is frustration borne out of deliberate embrace of willful refusal to inform oneself. Past experience has demonstrated these advocates have a complete lack of empathy for any argument that does not exactly conform to their own limited view of the world; therefore I do not expect them to understand the comparison. Perhaps a lurker would like to know.

John Hagee, The Roman Catholic Church, The Antichrist, Hitler, The Holocaust, (all on one convenient chart)
The Whited Sepulchre predicts further Christian sectarian strife as we near the 2008 presidential election.

I think Hagee and Jeremiah Wright will soon put together a vaudeville-style tour, where they’ll bring their theological wisdom to bear on the great issues of the day.

It’s true… God is not the Leading Cause of War
At Disillusioned Words, Jeffrey Stingerstein examines some pitfalls of faith.

I do not think that religions should be outlawed. And the religious should NOT be persecuted for their beliefs. But they only deserve the same respect that belief in Zeus is accorded in today’s society.

They Got Horse Racing in Heaven
The Ridger at The Greenbelt wonders why God killed Eight Belles.

God wanted her in his stable? God put her in the Derby, let her run well, and then killed her?

The Bible is Immoral. Let’s Move on.
At Disillusioned Words, Jeffrey Stingerstein researches client-patron relations and whether they offered some justification for the distinction between perceptions of scripture “then” and “now.”

I was recently told, after quoting Bible passages about infanticide and pillaging villages: “You are reading the text as if it were yesterday’s USA Today – as a 21st Century American. The ancient world was vastly different than the modern world….”

Demons Made my Daughter an Anorexic Lesbian
Sean the Blogonaut F.C.D. uncovers “The hidden danger of narrow faith based mental health provision.”

There seems to be unwritten, or unspoken understanding that anything Christian is both homogenous in the way it will handle social justice and mental health situations and by default have the clients best interests as a priority.

God is Brain-Dead
No More Mr. Nice Guy sees dead people. Brain-dead people, that is.

Walk around any large city and you will see mentally disturbed street people hanging around, picking fights with imaginary companions, and what not. Suppose I told you of a man who spends hours every day standing at a wall, rocking back and forth repetitively, droning on and on in a monotone directed at some invisible person that no-one else can see. You would probably conclude that the man is deluded, at the very least obsessive-compulsive, and in need of treatment lest he harm himself and possibly others.

What Would Convince You That You Were Wrong? The Difference Between Secular and Religious Faith
Is Religious Faith Irrational?
[These two posts from the same site are actually a single article in two parts. I've included both for continuity and clarity. -Pro]
Greta Christina has a unique and interesting take on faith and its distinctions.

I’m irritated by the argument that, because atheists don’t have faith in God, we therefore don’t have faith in anything. And at the same time, I’m irritated by the argument that, because atheists do have faith in things and can take leaps of faith, therefore an atheist’s secular faith in love and whatnot isn’t really any different from religious belief.

The Limits of Respect
Seth Manapio at Whiskey Before Breakfast…The Blog recounts an insightful anecdote about tolerance and respect.

[A]pparently the ex-boss said that she “had to respect” the daughter’s beliefs.

“No,” I said. “She doesn’t.”

Immanentizing the Z-Eschaton
Masks of Eris justifiably fears literal biblical interpretations.

I do not think there is a God, any god. If I did, what would I do? Probably scream in terror, since what follows is the “best” scenario I can think of.

Conservation of Good & Bad
Barry Leiba at Staring at Empty Pages has an interesting theory about the power and casualties of prayer.

Suppose… just suppose… that God’s master plan involves some sort of balance of good things and bad things. And that maybe the plan doesn’t call for a one-for-one sort of thing, but just an overall kind of balance, on a large scale.

Aliens, Mummies, and The Visit
Ordinary Girl (Tales of Ordinary Girl) contemplates experimentation while dealing with her religious relatives.

It’s not just that religion was ingrained in me from birth. I think I have shed most religious indoctrination. But it’s more in the way I interact with the world. I still have that skin of acceptability which I hide behind. You know, be respectful of religion and religious leaders, don’t express disbelief or any kind of skepticism about religious beliefs, and especially don’t encourage anyone else to pursue their skepticism.

Christian Nation, Prison Nation
VJACK at Atheist Revolution correlates prison populations with Christian influence, and suggests causation.

I am intrigued that the people most likely to proclaim that the United States is a Christian nation also tend to be those most responsible for perpetuating our status as the world’s leading prison nation.

A Non-Believer in Church: St. Peter’s Episcopal at Oxford
Oliver at Mississippi Atheists recounts an expedition to an Episcopal church from his non-believing perspective.

Most of the service was foreign to me. The services began with a procession of people in white robes holding various holy relics like a Bible or a Cross. I did not understand a single action of the minister. He had a metal ball that produced smoke that he started swinging at a candle. There is a deeper symbolic reference here I’m sure, but I’ve read the Bible from cover to cover and must have missed the references to a metal ball, the smoke, and the candle.

I don’t Believe in People Who Don’t Believe in Me
Natasha at Homo Academicus critiques an interview with Chris Hedges, author of “I Don’t Believe in Atheists.”

By calling new atheism “fundamentalist” he is not-so-subtly describing it in religious terms, playing into that tired out debate that atheism is a religion too. If you want atheists to take your message seriously, as indeed he must by agreeing to be interviewed on a notoriously atheistic podcast, you can’t start out by insulting them.

The Trouble With Prayer
Aaron Ross Powell explains why prayer is not a suitable replacement for personal responsibility.

Evil people do terrible things. This fact is not in dispute. But why a wholly benevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient god allows those terrible acts is a question that has plagued the faith of the religious since the time of the pre-Socratic Greeks. This is known as theodicy, or the problem of evil.

Questions of Morality
Lori at Between Us Girls asks some potent questions about our assumptions and our perceptions of morality.

Psst…I have a secret to tell you. You might find it quite shocking. Religion does not have a corner on the morality market.

Better Evangelism?
Anthroslug questions whether there is a better form of evangelism.

The basic problem that I have encountered with evangelism is that it tends to work from the premise that the person being evangelized needs to be “saved” – and condescension and insult naturally follows from there.

Vengeful Paths to Truth
Mark Koester, the Mystic Atheist, examines justice in light of retribution and forgiveness.

This is a paradox point to our social logic. Justice is about remembering and retribution. Forgiveness is about a kind of forgetting and a way of creating anew as sharing partners and joined story-tellers. Society must seek both, paradoxically.

Ayala to IDers – ‘God is the greatest abortionist’
SocraticGadfly recounts an influential concept that helped him achieve godlessness.

Francisco Ayala, one of the world’s greatest evolutionary biologists, AND one of the most renowned biological scientists openly defending the compatibility of evolution and religious belief, has been a busy man with the controversy over “Expelled.”

Thanks to all the contributors and submitters!

The next edition will be posted in two weeks from May 11, and will be held at Jyunri Kankeihttp://jyunri.blogspot.com/.

Make Carnival of the Godless submissions!

ALERT, ATTENTION! COTG NEEDS HOSTS! If COTG doesn’t get hosts, #92 will be the LAST ONE! (that’s from Brent’s fingers to your eyes!). If you’re interested in hosting, or know someone who is, please stop by Brent’s website and let him know. Let’s keep this thing rolling!

Scientology Unearthed: Part 2 of 2

Friday, December 14th, 2007

The word ‘Scientology’ comes from the Latin word ‘scio’ meaning ‘knowing in the fullest sense of the word’ and the Greek word ‘logos’ meaning ‘study of.’ The doctrine of Scientology was recorded by L. Ron Hubbard in 500,000 pages of writings, 6,500 reels of tape and 42 films. This doctrine reflects the influence of the Hindu concept of karma, as well as the psychological theories of Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, and William Sargant. Scientology does not have a single book that is the equivalent of the Bible or the Quran, but the study of Scientology may be done chronologically through its basic books and lectures.1

Scientology states that it is fully compatible with all existing major world religions, but in fact, Scientology only allows a passive formal membership in a second religion. Because of the major differences in beliefs and practices between Scientology and most major world religions, to call them compatible is disingenuous. Followers are not permitted to participate in other religious activities or ceremonies outside of Scientology. They do, however, celebrate many of our cultural holidays such as Christmas and New Year’s, although these celebrations remain primarily secular.2

Scientologists believe that humans survive across eight dynamics, “Self,” “Family and Sex,” “Group,” “Humanity,” “The Animal Kingdom,” “The Physical Universe,” “Spirits,” and “God or Infinity.” They believe all of these dynamics must be considered equally. The Scientology cross, which is often used to represent the Church of Scientology, has eight sides which represent these eight dynamics.3 Scientology offers no specific dogma, but Scientologists believe the nature of a Supreme Being is revealed to individuals as they become more spiritually aware. They believe that a universal life force (theta) exists in all humans and that humans (thetans) are capable of achieving a nearly godlike state through Scientology practices. One of these practices is Dianetics, which Hubbard claimed could “invariably cure all psychosomatic ills and human aberrations.”4 According to Hubbard, people become “aberrated” by traumatic incidents and bad decisions (even those that occurred in past lives; Scientologists believe we are immortal) and must free themselves of this trauma through a process called “auditing.” They believe that through this process, they can achieve states of increasingly greater mental awareness, called Pre-Clear, Clear, and Operating Thetan. They believe Operating Thetans have the power to control matter, energy, space, time, thought, and life.5

Most auditing sessions employ a device called the Hubbard Electropsychometer. Scientologists believe this “E-Meter” can help an individual achieve a state of Clear, and eventually Operating Thetan, through measuring changes in the electrical resistance of the mind. To do this, approximately 0.5 volts are passed through a pair of tin-plated tubes held by the Pre-Clear and attached to the E-Meter by wires. It is believed that this aids the auditor in identifying engrams (unconscious, painful memories), incidents (alien interventions from past lives), and implants (engrams which are inflicted deliberately and with evil intent). According to Hubbard, extraterrestrial dictatorships such as Helatrobus attempted to brainwash and control the population trillions of years ago through these implants, and this is the derivation of many of our past traumas. Hubbard wrote extensive accounts of complex extraterrestrial civilizations and their interventions in earthly events, collectively described as “space opera.” Scientology’s Trementina Base has a huge symbol carved into the ground which marks a ‘return point’ for members, so they can find the founder’s works when they travel here in the future from other galaxies.6

It is very difficult for Scientologists to advance into the eight Operating Thetan (OT) levels of study. Those who participate in these advanced courses are strictly forbidden from discussing or disclosing their contents. However, in 1995, a former member published excerpts and descriptions of these materials online, and they were quickly circulated by the mainstream media, so we now have access to much of the teachings.7 Those who reach OT level III are told of the story of Xenu, an alien who lived 75 million years ago and was the ruler of the “Galactic Confederacy.” According to these teachings, he brought billions of people to Earth in spacecraft, stacked them around volcanoes and blew them up with hydrogen bombs. Their souls then clustered together and stuck to the bodies of the living. Scientologists believe that many of the physical illnesses modern-day humans experience are caused by these clustered alien souls, or “Body Thetans,” who continue to stick to us today.

-Laura

  1. Bridge Publications: The Basics [<]
  2. Steve Bruce: Cathedrals to cults: the evolving forms of the religious life. In: Paul Heelas (Hrsg.): Religion, Modernity, and Postmodernity, Blackwell, Oxford 1998, pp. 19-35, 23. [<]
  3. Introduction to Scientology Ethics, 2007 edition, pg. 12 [<]
  4. Hubbard, “Dianetics,” Astounding Science Fiction, May 1950 [<]
  5. http://www.beliefnet.com/story/80/story_8057_1.html [<]
  6. Leiby, Richard Scientology church’s mark inscribed in N.M. desert scrub, published November 29, 2005 in the Free New Mexican [<]
  7. Reitman, Janet, “Inside Scientology: Unlocking the complex code of America’s most mysterious religion,” Rolling Stone, 2006 [<]

The Sacred Cow- Total Bull! Three Big Bright Books of the New Rational Activism

Monday, November 26th, 2007

We live in a post 9/11 world. Pre-9/11, public criticism of another person’s religious beliefs was strictly in the realm of the socially outrageous: provocateurs like George Carlin, Madonna, Sinead O’Connor, and self-proclaimed contrarians like Christopher Hitchens (who deserves his own book review). While the attacks on the US perpetrated by a relatively small group of Islamic fundamentalists were seen by many as a call to defend the US, many prominent thinkers saw it as a continuation of a disturbing pattern. Religious fundamentalists both in the United States and abroad, according to these thinkers, are waging a war on science and rational thought. Not only are they blowing up buildings, but they are also doing less obvious damage, by getting elected to school boards in order to prevent children from learning modern science and history. We cannot afford to stand idly by while those who cling to ancient superstition spread the gospel of willful ignorance and revisionist history, unchecked. Here are three big books in what promises to be a very long-term war of ideas and ideals:

Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon ISBN 0-670-03472 Penguin Group 2006

One of the best arguments against rational activism seems to be the abundance of the irrational around us. How do they thrive in society, when most of them are either too stubborn or clearly incapable of making sense of the universe? What makes people cling to superstition when there are better explanations at hand? Why do people turn to superstition in times of fear, anxiety, or when faced with danger? Why do some religious people spend so much time and energy, and indeed commit acts against their own moral codes in order to protect these beliefs? And why should secular folk not question the so-called moral authority of these ancient traditions?

Daniel Dennett, American Philosopher and Scholar at Tufts University, takes on the notion that religion is “off-limits” for scientific and philosophical scrutiny. Dennett discusses the natural, and yes, evolutionary reasons why human beings invent religions in nearly every culture in existence. The same inquisitive nature that allows man to understand nature also allows us to become overwhelmed with fear. The same essence in mankind that drives us to invent amazing technologies also allows us to invent supernatural explanations for natural phenomena long before we had the tools to discover better understanding. The same emotions that lead us to create sophisticated social networks also give us abundant reason to hope for connection with our loved ones after death.

From this revolutionary bit of poking at the sacred cow, Richard Dawkins goes one stepgod delusion further, to cow-tipping. Not satisfied with questioning the public ban on questioning the religious, he goes further, and calls them, well… nuts.

The God Delusion (2006) ISBN 0-618-68000-4

Richard Dawkins is an Evolutionary Biologist, Ethologist and the Chair for the Public Understanding of Science at the University of Oxford. He is also really tired of creationists inventing and repeating bad science like one of those inane chain e-mails you get from your well-intentioned neighbor about how Bill Gates is going to give you lots of money for forwarding an email to your friends and family. You know, the ones you disprove in three seconds of Google searching? Well, for rational activists who are not also evolutionary biologists, Richard Dawkins is Snopes.com, a one-man army, willing to dismiss the so-called arguments of creationists wherever he goes (and he goes just about everywhere) spreading the good news of science. Not only does he say we should question the superstitious, but that we all have a duty to point out the naked state of the Emperor.

Religion, he says, will destroy your mind and shrink your brain. Calling an argument with a creationist a debate is an insult to actual rational debate. Dawkins, as a quick trip to Youtube will show, is not afraid to exchange one-line demolitions of twisted creationist logic. That is all the oxygen that he is generally willing to spend in exchange with such people (with exceptions). However, the subject of this type of person is an entirely different story. In The God Delusion, Dawkins takes on the stereotype of the pessimistic, suicidal atheist. In fact, he argues, happiness in atheism is superior to happiness under a cloud of delusion, because those who reject superstition have independent thought and healthy attitudes. Dawkins also questions the common idea that it’s a good thing to give children religious training for the sake of ethics and morals. What’s so moral about lying to children? He points out. Religious education is indoctrination into a cult, and should be regarded as child abuse.

end of faithFrom cow-tipping to planning the barbecue, we come once again to Sam Harris, this time for the book that sparked the controversy that lead to one of the last books reviewed here, Letter to a Christian Nation. This book, of course, is The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason (2004) ISBN 0-393-03515-8. This book predates the other two in this series by a couple of years, but it is arguably the boldest of the three. Dennett invites people to question where they used to demure or defer. Dawkins, himself a brilliant scientist, is clearly annoyed at having to defend some of the most brilliant work of modern science from those who benefit from the fruits of and yet denounce it at every turn, as one can see from witnessing creationist youtube vloggers. Harris pulls no punches at all. He opens his call for the end of religion with a day in the life of a suicide bomber. He holds up this mirror to all religious fundamentalists, announcing- this is the natural extension of your beliefs. The Spanish Inquisition, Nazis, Suicide bombers and flying planes into buildings, these are the natural extensions of those who have the courage of their conventions.

Not only does Harris criticize the religious, but also anyone (including non-religious intellectuals such as Noam Chomsky) who fails to identify religion as a major factor in the world’s biggest problems. It is the indoctrination into illogic, into superstition and even allowing freedom of belief that “allows otherwise normal human beings to reap the fruits of madness and consider them holy.”

Harris advocates a societal abandonment (the kind that Christians are always accusing society of anyway) of religion, and demanding that within the realm of freedom of expression there is room for question, speculation and imagination, there is no room for tolerating dangerous superstitions that are, he says, on par with any other mental illness that leads people to commit atrocities. He constructs a rational ethical system, and also allows for the non-supernatural spirituality of enlightened eastern philosophies which advocate meditation and do not require god-belief. He makes a distinction between non-supernatural mysticism as within the realm of rationalism, but supernatural religious beliefs as being firmly outside of that realm, and not worthy of respect.

Any one of these books would be worthy of activist gift-giving. I myself will consider wrapping them in gold paper, as a poetic nod to the alchemy of turning Christmas back into the Yule from which it came.

Lies, Damn Lies, and Creationism

Thursday, November 1st, 2007

Book Review- Monkey Girl, by Edward Humes

Book review by L.Grey, with permission.

In the time of Galileo it was argued that the texts, ‘And the sun stood still … and hasted not to go down about a whole day’ (Joshua x. 13) and ‘He laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not move at any time’ (Psalm cv. 5) were an adequate refutation of the Copernican theory.

Alan Turing, Computing Machinery and Intelligence, Mind 59 (1950), 443.

Monkey Girl by Edward Humes ISBN: 9780060885489, ISBN10: 0060885483 Ecco (imprint of Harper Collins) Hardcover 400 pages, $25.95

What does it mean when proponents of Intelligent Design say “teach the controversy”?

You may think you know what the controversy is about, but you’ll never get a more thorough and up-to-date analysis of the Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District trial than Edward Humes’ book Monkey Girl. The 2005 trial was one of the latest episodes of the seemingly never-ending struggle for the hearts and minds of public school students. This is a fight between those who feel that Science describes nature pretty well, and those who believe that anything other than a strict literal interpretation of the Bible deserves a trip to hell and excommunication from polite society. The trial itself was a gripping account of small-town drama unfolding over the course of a year, of parents and children enduring intimidation and humiliation. Witnesses from both sides turned the courtroom into a fascinating arena of scientific evidence versus faith dressed in science’s clothing. At least three books have come out of the case (see further reading below for details), and Ed Humes’ Pulitzer Prize-winning writing style and even-handed coverage make Monkey Girl a compelling choice. Humes not only covers the case, he describes the town as the trial transforms it:

Dover sits firmly astride the front lines of America’s culture war, occupying the uneasy space between America’s religious faith and its longstanding fondness for scientific progress, between an idealized past and an uncertain future, between education and indoctrination, between the natural and the supernatural. For the next several months, the ninth floor courtroom in the Ronald Reagan Federal Building will belong to Kitzmiller et al versus Dover Area School District, an unintentionally epic lawsuit filed by a group of parents against their evolution-doubting school board. The case does indeed have much in common with the 1925 Scopes Monkey trial, a public spectacle in which Clarence Darrow and the American Civil Liberties Union unsuccessfully challenged a Tennessee law banning the teaching of evolution. But unlike its illustrious predecessor (which, popular imagination and classic films notwithstanding, had exactly no impact on the law or educational practice at the time), the Dover case is positioned to define (or redefine) for decades just what children are taught about where we come from. [prologue, Monkey Girl]

The controversy has shifted a bit since the famous 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial, which first questioned the legality of teaching Darwin’s theory of Evolution in public schools. World War II and the Cold War demanded that the United States produce competent scientists. This demand seemed to effectively muzzle fundamentalists for a few decades. High School Biology classes approaching the Theory of Evolution would often involve an uneasy truce involving the words “changes over time” and neatly sidestepping the origins of life. Until reading this book, I assumed that all but the most extreme religious fundamentalists were fine with this truce. Humes’ book shows precisely how much this has changed.

While the book mostly focuses on the Dover trial, Humes also takes us to a similar trial in Kansas, the controversy involving the gift shop at the Grand Canyon, where Creationists have had some success in censoring information about the geological age of the national monument. Most importantly, Humes follows the trail of intellectual and legal deception to the pseudo-scientific think-tank called The Discovery Institute, a group of scientists who exclude any scientific evidence in conflict with Christian Scripture.

The Dover Trial is full of drama and bad debate, A Scopes Monkey Trial for the 21st century, or Inherit the Wind, Redux. Humes shows in the Dover case how Creationism in public schools, having been defeated in courts during the late 20th century under the Separation of Church and State clause of the First Amendment, evolved (pun intended) into the virtually identical Intelligent Design movement, to Dover, Pennsylvania among other places. Some of the most shocking moments of the trial feature the ironic displays of dishonesty which ultimately brought down the school board members who were trying to bring religion into the local biology classrooms. Humes covers the scope of the grand scheme of religious activists, who plan on infusing not only science classes with Christian dogma and bias, but History, Government, and other classes as well.

This very book elicits criticism from those whose definition of “Fair and Balanced” have been warped to Orwellian proportions by Fox News and today’s most hyperbolic propagandists. Humes compassionately portrays how the plaintiffs’ religious beliefs in this case, were attacked and their children mocked at school out of ignorance. The Dover case pitted one kind of Christians against another. Those who favored the separation of Church and State were attacked as “not Christian enough”, in a great example of how the separation of these two functions protects freedom of religion. Another surprising turn of events showed how the presiding judge, a Bush-supporting Republican was branded as a liberal judicial activist for defending the constitution.

While it is clear on which side Humes’ sympathies lie, the reader is necessarily confronted with the heart of the so-called controversy: regarding extreme religious views which by definition do not tolerate any opposing views, what are the limits of tolerance in society? How can a democracy defend pluralism from those whose religious beliefs clash so vehemently with the definition of reality itself by the rest of the world, both secular and religious? The Framers of the Constitution were historically not far away from centuries of religious wars in Europe which constantly threw governments into turmoil. They saw the value of the separation of church and state to both church and state. Back in those days religious persecution meant death or incarceration because of one’s beliefs, not what passes for persecution these days in the minds of some.

One gets the strong impression reading Humes’ insightful analysis, that this latest version of the old Darwin-vs.-God controversy is the product of the removal of Critical Thinking skills from the mainstream public school curriculum, and the lack of a Cold War Era push towards developments in Math & Science, supported by all but the most outspoken of Bible literalists, who constantly attempt to couch the debate as “God vs. Darwin”, when in fact, most religions don’t require people to choose between the two. In my opinion, this is a clear case of the old adage, “Those who ignore history are condemned to repeat it”. Young-Earth Creationists might benefit from not ignoring the history of the Catholic Church’s censorship of Copernicus and Galileo hundreds of years ago, and ask themselves why the Pope doesn’t have a big problem with Darwin’s theories today.

-Philadelphic 

Further reading on the Dover Trial:

Web sources:

Ed Humes’ blog chronicles his continuing experiences with Monkey Girl, including book signings, media coverage and informative links regarding the case.

www.edwardhumes.com

From the Wikipedia article on Kitzmiller v. Dover: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District

I.D.: The Politics of Intelligent Design Columbia University Political Union video presentation by Joel Cracraft, Nick Matzke, Barbara Forrest. Contains lecture on contributing to the winning of Kitzmiller by Nick Matzke. February 2006. (Quicktime movie file)

Science Wars: Should Schools Teach Intelligent Design? Video of American Enterprise Institute forum that took place during the Kitzmiller case, originally broadcast on C-SPAN. Featuring Richard Thompson of the Thomas More Law Center, Paul Nelson and Mark Ryland of the Discovery Institute and Barbara Forrest. October 2005. (Windows Media file)

A presentation given by Kenneth Miller covering the Intelligent Design movement, with considerable detail to the Kitzmiller trial, at Case Western Reserve University. January 2006. (Flash FLV File)

Intelligent Design: Should It Be Taught in Public Schools? Post-trial meeting of the Commonwealth Club of California featuring Casey Luskin and Cornelius Hunter of the Discovery Institute and Eugenie Scott of the National Center for Science Education and Eric Rothschild of Pepper Hamilton LLP. May 2006. (RAM media file)

Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District, et al., Case No. 04cv2688

The complete pdf file of the ruling:
http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf

Other Books regarding the Dover Trial:

Barbara Forrest was a crucial witness for the plaintiff, revealing the deceptive strategy employed by Creationist groups. The paperback edition includes a chapter on the Dover trial. $19.95, Oxford University Press ISBN 10: 0195319737
ISBN 13: 978-0195319736

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapman, Matthew (2007). 40 Days and 40 Nights: Darwin, Intelligent Design, God, OxyContin and Other Oddities on Trial in Pennsylvania. Harper Collins. ISBN 0061179450.

 

Matthew Chapman is a direct descendant of Charles Darwin.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Slack, Gordy (2007). The Battle Over the Meaning of Everything: Evolution, Intelligent Design, and a School Board in Dover, PA. Jossey-Bass. ISBN 0787987867.