Re: Of PhDs, priests and logic

Steve Clark (ssclark@facstaff.wisc.edu)
Tue, 16 Apr 1996 22:05:08 -0500

I agree with Jim's post and especially liked the he described the Priesthood
Fallacy (what I call professionalized purity)

>That being said, there is an equal error the S can make, one Denis seems to
>lapse into from time to time. It is what I call the Priesthood Fallacy. Here,
>the S uses his hard earned knowledge to wrap himself in the raiments of
>episcopacy and pronounce all the unordained as rabble or, worse, pagans. They
>chain their Scriptures (read: primary literature) to the pulpit and say, "The
>rabble cannot understand. Listen only to us."

>I received the following via another avenue, but it is so highly relevant I
>have to pass it along. It's from a 1931 book, but it's argument is timely and
>sound.
>
>From: THE BASIS OF EVOLUTIONARY FAITH, Floyd E. Hamilton, James Clarke &
>Company, Limited, London, 1931
>
> "At this point in our discussion we are faced with a serious difficulty.
>Scientists in general claim only scientists have a right to criticize
>scientists. They implicitly or explicitly assume that no one can criticize
>either their evidence or arguments unless he is a scientist of recognized
>standing.

This amplifies Jim's point, but the historical context may be interesting
here. In the early part of this century, much of the anti-evolution
sentiment resided with the Seventh Day Adventists. Several of the leaders
of the

"...leaders of what historian Ronald Numbers termed the
"underground anti-evolution movement" included Seventh Day
Adventists, Henry Rimmer, and George McReady Price, both of
whom had little formal science education, but who billed themselves
as scientists and published self-described REAL scientific texts of
geology. There was also Helen G. White, a self-declared prophetess
from the Seventh Day Adventist Church who claimed divine
inspiration for her revolutionary view that a world-wide Noahchian
flood accounted for the geologic column and the fossil record, a belief
currently held by scientific creationists."

Much of the scientific revisionism espoused by many of the critics of
evolution was based on very poor science. Thus, in 1931, there was a good
reason for the criticism by scientists of the "primordial" scientific
creationists.

For more on this issue, I recommend Ron Numbers' book, The Creationists. It
represents a definitive history of the movement.

Steve

__________________________________________________________________________
Steven S. Clark, Ph.D. Phone: (608) 263-9137
Associate Professor FAX: (608) 263-4226
Dept. of Human Oncology and email: ssclark@facstaff.wisc.edu
UW Comprehensive Cancer Ctr
University of Wisconsin
Madison, WI 53792

"To disdain philosophy is really to be a philosopher." Blaise Pascal, Pensees
__________________________________________________________________________