> Mr. Schimmrich, I'm sorry I cluttered your mailbox. I thought this was a
> "free-sharing, free-thinking" group of scientists. I obviously ruffled
> your feathers...or maybe geodes. That was not my intention.
You didn't ruffle my feathers at all. I would hope that we are "free-
sharing" (including disagreements) but the phrase "free-thinking" raises
red flags (Humanists like that phrase). Anyway, I understand what you mean
and you are, of course, correct.
> I appreciate your reply, however, it seems rather vicious. In fact, it
> appears you are attacking me.
I sincerely apologize for that. It was not my intention to be vicious
or attack you personally. I tend to write off quick replies sometimes
without thinking too long about how they might appear in tone.
> Yes, when interpreting a man's work, it does help to attempt to see
> where he is coming from. There was nothing sinister about the
> inquiry.
I didn't mean to imply the inquiry was sinister, only the implicit
suggestion of "silence" on the part of people discussing the issue (like
they didn't want it discussed). I was half joking anyway.
> I just think it is odd that he graduated from Christ College
> with a B.A. in Theology, that's all. Obviously, he had perspective
> that many scientist would not have. If that is not signficant, or at
> least odd in your eyes, then maybe you have a problem.
I was just unsure of what your point was. You are, of course, correct
that having a degree in theology would give him a perspective on things
that, perhaps, non-theologians would not have. I don't think it was all
that odd, however, since many natural scientists of the past had a
theological education. In those days, there weren't any biology departments
and if you wanted to be a natural scientist you would get a degree in
something else, usually medicine. I seem to remember reading (maybe I'm
wrong, if so I'm sure people will leap in to correct me :) that Darwin
started studying medicine in Edinburgh but didn't have the stomach for it.
For a gentleman of Darwin's day, a degree in theology wasn't too unusual and
a vicars job would give him time to study natural history in his free time
(he liked collecting and studying beetles, for example). It certainly wasn't
as unusual as a scientists with a theological education would be today.
> Too many times we hear someone bashed for their comments (especially
> on this listserve), and frequently the come-back is, "Are you a ???
> (geologist, biologist, etc.) with the assumption being that if you're
> not then you could not possibly have anything intelligent to say. If
> that is so, then Darwin was not a scientist, but rather a theologian.
I disagree with your claim about the listserver. I think the problem is
when people claim that evolution is false, for example, yet have never
studied biology in any serious way. One doesn't need to be a biologist to
comment on various aspects of evolutionary theory but one does need to
really understand what modern-day biologists actually do say about it and
why they believe it to be true.
Anyway, I think Darwin was a first-rate scientist and he practiced
science (indeed, he revolutionized science) not theology. He pastored
no flock nor made any contributions to the study of theology (except,
perhaps, indirectly by proposing evolutionary theory).
> Again, my inquiry. Would anyone like to comment on how Darwin's training
> prepared/did not prepare him, what premise did he begin with...If such
> questions are not legit for this listserve, then maybe I'm on the wrong
> channel!
Of course they're legitimate, I was just unclear of exactly what you were
getting at in your last post.
I'm sure there's voluminous literature on this topic, maybe some on the
listerver can suggest references?
> In the future, Mr. Schimmrich, I would appreciate it if you would exercise
> a little more professionalism when answering, rather than using such a
> hostile approach (unless of course you own this list, of which I would owe
> you an apology).
Again, I sincerely apologize for writing a post that made it seem I was
attacking you. That was not my intention. I wouldn't classify myself as
hostile, but I do tend to be confrontational in these types of discussions.
My apologies. God bless.
- Steve (not Mr. Schimmrich)!
-- Steven H. Schimmrich KB9LCG s-schim@uiuc.edu Department of Geology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 245 Natural History Building, Urbana, IL 61801 (217) 244-1246 http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/s-schim Fides quaerens intellectum