« "Anthropology's Dream Tribe" | Main | Missing the Point of "Higher Education" »
Wednesday, December 21, 2005
Victory in Dover
The few people that do read this blog have probably already heard of the court decision in Dover, PA which says teaching intelligent design in public schools is unconstitutional and violates the separation of church and state. Almost every science-related blog that I read has commented on it so take your pick from the list to the left and read the thoughts of people more informed on the issue than I am. I am, however, compelled to offer my opinion on the matter from the perspective of a graduate student of anthropology.
Needless to say, I am elated by today’s news. It is not only a victory for science but a victory for the United States in general. I’ll focus on the former briefly. The more I read about intelligent design and the more I learn about human origins and anthropological theory, the more I realize how important it is to fight these people. My opinion only a few weeks ago was that the best thing we could do as anthropologists would be to ignore creationists and not give them the time of day. After all, it seemed that by getting the scientific community fired up was playing right into their plan of promoting creationism (a.k.a. intelligent design) as a valid alternative to evolutionary theory. If creationism isn’t really valid, why give it the time of day. Now, the more I contemplate the whole situation the more I realize what danger creationists pose to the future of this country.
I am now starting to think about finding a balance between ignoring creationism and its followers and crushing them by continuing to do good science. Currently, evolution is in no danger of loosing its status as a widely accepted theory (both within and outside of the scientific community). Creationists are a small percentage of the population that are trying to elbow their way into the realm of valid science and they are increasingly resorting to “wedge tactics” that attempt to undermine expected holes or “gaps” in the theory of biological evolution. If creationism is a valid alternative to evolution, such methods would not be needed. This to me is the most frustrating aspect of the whole debate. Anyone who has been following the debate will see that evolution rarely even needs to defend itself, just discredit creationism (which is laughably easy).
I won’t pretend to be an expert in evolutionary biology but I do know what sound science has produced in the past century. The Dover decision is a landmark victory (sorry for that cliché) but the fight is not over. Our job here on out is to defend the evolutionary history of humanity by continuing to swat at creationism like an annoying gnat buzzing in the ear of science. I hate to admit it, but the increasing visibility of Christian fundamentalism in the Untied States, creationism and intelligent design will continue to pose a risk as long as it appeals to peoples’ ignorance.
Posted by Will at December 21, 2005 02:03 AM in Anthropology | Personal Reflections