Dear Liam
Are we right about evolution? In some College classes evolution is taught as scientific fact. But in other classes (e.g. Religious Studies and General Studies) students sometimes tell us that their religious beliefs mean they can’t accept the theory of evolution – and in those classes, we generally affirm everyone’s right to their own belief. Are we contradicting ourselves? What happens when the students who’ve studied evolution move into a General Studies class – will they feel they’re getting a consistent message? What happens when students with a religious objection to evolution have to study it? Can we do this any better than we currently do?
Janet
Dear Janet
There are a lot of interesting issues here. But let’s hold on a minute: first of all I hope you’re not implying we’re wrong about evolution: are you?? I’d have a pretty firm answer to that!
Liam
Dear Liam
I thought that might get your attention!!
Personally, no, I don’t think we’re wrong about evolution. And, as someone who has to teach religious responses to evolution, it’s really important to me to make it clear that the vast majority of religious people accept the theory of evolution, and don’t see it as contradicting their faith.
But I don’t think that closes the discussion: it still worries me that we haven’t worked out a really wise approach to this sort of issue.
Janet
Dear Janet
We should certainly allow everyone to have their own religious belief, and to discuss issues around faith in appropriate subjects. However, faith, by definition, lies outside of the scientific realm, and as such is not relevant in the Science classroom. Intelligent design, for example, is not a scientific theory, and schools in the US are breaking the law if it is taught as Science.
As far as evolution goes, there is a very significant amount of evidence that evolution happens. We should not be misled by the frequently raised argument that evolution is ‘just a theory’, as this word has very different meanings in a scientific context and general vocabulary.
I would hope that students who have a religious belief could accept the teaching of evolution in a scientific framework; and I think that these are not mutually incompatible. It is particularly important that students don’t see conflict between religion and evolution without studying the subject with an open mind.
Liam
Dear Liam
Well, there speaks the Head of Science! But honestly, I’m not convinced that’s good enough.
First, I think there are lots of reasons why people would object to your argument that ‘faith, by definition, lies outside of the scientific realm.’ It is convenient to say this – but it’s not necessarily true. For people of faith, faith is all-embracing: it can include diet, dress, activities, beliefs, and attitudes to absolutely everything. It’s holistic, and will affect attitudes to science – both for religious believers who accept evolution, and for those who don’t.
Second, although I don’t hold to Intelligent Design, I think those who do would see it as a scientific theory: so, who gets to define what is scientific? Couldn’t we find several examples of ideas that were once written off as non-scientific, which are now accepted?
Which leads to my last point: are you and I, believers in evolution, complacent? We want our opponents to have ‘an open mind’ and yet we seem to have a pretty closed mind about their views.
Janet
Dear Janet,
I don’t argue that faith isn’t all embracing for those who have it. I accept this completely, and that in itself can be a wonderful thing.
However, we have a very specific and functional definition of what Science is, and it involves making a hypothesis that can be repeatedly tested by experiment. I would still argue that religion does not fit this definition.
When it comes to ‘who gets to define what is scientific’, there are instances when it has been decided by judge and jury. And on the most recent occasion, it was ruled that Intelligent Design is not Science, and as such could not be lawfully taught in US schools. Science, like any subject has to have boundaries, and the definition is clear. With a clear definition it is also very clear what is and is not Science. Furthermore, Science is a method, not an idea; it can test ideas if the idea provides a hypothesis that can be verified or otherwise. Religion does not do this.
I would, nevertheless like to reinforce that this does not mean that in general scientists do not accept faith as a valid characteristic. Some scientists do, some don’t. Some scientists are also extremely religious. Some are complacent about faith, some definitely not. I personally think all of us, religious or not, should be more tolerant, and have a more open mind about ways of looking at the world.
Liam
What do you think?[Cirencester College students can also join this debate on CCO on Monday as part of Multifaith week]
