2008 Woodie Awards
A response to Levy and Smith
Issue date: 4/12/07 Section: Opinion
Please don't worry. Academic freedom and freedom of speech are very much alive and well here at SMU. It turns out that even scientists have a First Amendment guarantee to the right to express themselves, and not surprisingly, some of us even exercise this right. It seems you are worried that some members of the science faculty here at SMU raised an objection to the administration that the Darwin vs. Design event will be held in McFarlin Auditorium.
I think it is important to point out that one does not have to make a choice between religion and science. For many people of many beliefs, science and religion are very compatible with one another. There are in fact many expert, practicing scientists that are devoutly religious. Dr. Francis Collins, the director of the Human Genome Research Institute, is an evangelical Christian biologist. A look at his recent book "The Language of God" may serve to convince those with strong religious beliefs that modern science and modern biology are very compatible with religion. Last year Dr. Collins was quoted in Religion and Ethics Newsweekly as saying, "the evidence that we are all descended from a common ancestor is overwhelming. Some might wish that not to be so. It is so. Does this conflict with Genesis 1 and 2? I don't believe it does."
Why did some of the faculty object to the upcoming intelligent design event being held at SMU? One of the objections was made because the event is attempting to promote religious belief as objective science. This is deceptive. The statement that intelligent design is not science but rather a faith-based, religious belief system reflects the opinions and decisions of the overwhelming majority of America's best scientists and highest courts.
The organization behind the upcoming event, the Discovery Institute, has a political agenda that is attempting to replace objective science with their version of faith and this is disturbing to many of us in our society, not just scientists.
It is important to separate what is knowable through science from that which is not knowable by science. We can use science for useful and important things, from cancer therapy to influenza vaccines to space exploration. Explanations and discoveries drawn from the material world actually work in the material world. That is the utility of science. That is why our society spends billions of dollars every year on science. It works. It improves our condition. If you doubt this, you doubt the validity of modern medical science, airline travel and everything useful science has produced. Science and its derivatives are arguably America's most important domestic product. But if you blur the lines between what is science and what is religious belief, you will undermine its usefulness.
I think it is important to point out that one does not have to make a choice between religion and science. For many people of many beliefs, science and religion are very compatible with one another. There are in fact many expert, practicing scientists that are devoutly religious. Dr. Francis Collins, the director of the Human Genome Research Institute, is an evangelical Christian biologist. A look at his recent book "The Language of God" may serve to convince those with strong religious beliefs that modern science and modern biology are very compatible with religion. Last year Dr. Collins was quoted in Religion and Ethics Newsweekly as saying, "the evidence that we are all descended from a common ancestor is overwhelming. Some might wish that not to be so. It is so. Does this conflict with Genesis 1 and 2? I don't believe it does."
Why did some of the faculty object to the upcoming intelligent design event being held at SMU? One of the objections was made because the event is attempting to promote religious belief as objective science. This is deceptive. The statement that intelligent design is not science but rather a faith-based, religious belief system reflects the opinions and decisions of the overwhelming majority of America's best scientists and highest courts.
The organization behind the upcoming event, the Discovery Institute, has a political agenda that is attempting to replace objective science with their version of faith and this is disturbing to many of us in our society, not just scientists.
It is important to separate what is knowable through science from that which is not knowable by science. We can use science for useful and important things, from cancer therapy to influenza vaccines to space exploration. Explanations and discoveries drawn from the material world actually work in the material world. That is the utility of science. That is why our society spends billions of dollars every year on science. It works. It improves our condition. If you doubt this, you doubt the validity of modern medical science, airline travel and everything useful science has produced. Science and its derivatives are arguably America's most important domestic product. But if you blur the lines between what is science and what is religious belief, you will undermine its usefulness.
Viewing Comments 1 - 1 of 1
Scott Rewak
posted 4/12/07 @ 5:40 PM EST
Excellent explanation, Dr. Wise. (An appropriate name if I have ever heard one). It is simply a matter of 2 different topics, religion and science.
Post a Comment