First,I would like to say that I thought the conference was great. I would
congratulate the organizers on a fine conference. However, what they
presented didn't come across like they thought it would. The Christian
laity got a chance to see that their arguments are not infallible and that
some of their heroes can't answer some very tough questions. It is a shame
that the faculty senate at Baylor is killing the Polanyi center because of
the above and
because it will be interpreted as just another example of naturalists and
materialists who want to stifle discussion rather than engage in it. We
can't do that if all we do is avoid confronting them in public in front of
their own supporters. The only way to change Christian perspectives on this
area is to show that the arguments are weak. This conference with only one
exception (Paul Nelson's paper) showed the extreme weakness of the
traditional Christian anti-science position. And maybe the fact that Paul's
talk was the only really challenging one simply illuminates the emptiness
and voidness of the other papers presented in defense of the theist
position. Believe me, the Christians I spoke to were appalled at
Schaeffer's talk which followed Weinberg. They aren't dummies. They may
appear to outsiders to be, but they are listening and they do want good
answers to those atheists. I spoke with several people who were shaken by
the way the arguments went against their viewpoint. Those I spoke to know
they didn't get quality when they needed it. That is the first step towards
realizing that one might need to change ones views.
As I mentioned in my report, one christian stood by the elevator in order to
tell my agnostic friend Frank, that Schaeffer was not the best Christian
apologetics has to offer. Unfortunately, my feeling is that Schaeffer just
may have been the best and when exposed, it is an embarassment to look in
the mirror.
But, the scientific community at large will be glad to see the Polanyi
Center die.
They don't understand what a good thing it is for their cause. What a shame.
No one can prove there is a God or a Designer, but no one can present
evidence that disproves him either. The truly interesting questions in life
are those for which we don't have absolute certainty. But we in the
scientific community will act as if we have absolute certainty and make
martyrs of the ID group--and this is something that will merely add to their
appeal--contrary to the their desires.
My personal objection to the ID movement is what was pointed out over and
over throughout the conference during question and answer sessions. They
present no scenario, they don't suggest any new way of doing science, and
they avoid verification and falsification. They want to wind the scientific
world without doing the hard and risky work of actually telling us what
happened. THey are a movement without any cause for which to fight. They
have no unifying principle. Because of this, they are a broken reed which
many Christians wish to lean upon. They offer nothing of substance, but like
the young-earth creationists they just offer wrong reasons to disbelieve
what modern science is showing. Christian acceptance of this movement will
be viewed poorly in future years.
What needs to be done is present carefully crafted arguments in
forums just like the one that they put on at Baylor. They, unlike the Ken
Ham and ICR crowd, at least were willing to invite their opponents to the
table in a non-adversarial/non-spectacle format. Many in science seem to
want to push
their opponents away and not beat them at their own game. That looks and is
tacky.
John Baumgardner's comment that the naturalists were dominating the
conference was a telling comment about how the theist position fared during
this conference. It was sad to see Steve Meyer, a friend with whom I worked
at ARCO back in the 80s standing there trying to avoid aswering a question
by saying that his argument was restricted to the origin of life, and saying
it over and over. It did not show any robustness to this thesis. It was sad
to see Behe not answer a question seriously when he was asked what he would
want science to do differently. (He was asked what he would do if he had
control of all the funding. Ans. keep it himself. And then he did say that
he wanted someone else to do research in a lab to support his theory. Why
wouldn't he want to do his own research?) It was sad to see the 'deer in
headlights' look on Dembski's face as he faced a forest of hands wanting to
criticize his theory. And the critics were those like Ide Trotter and John
Baumgardner who should have agreed with him. And I would point you to this,
from a Christian mother who home schools and with whom I am now having a
conversation via e-mail. She didn't want her name used because she didn't
want any crank e-mail. (She is a bit afraid of the mail she might get from
Christians on this!).
She said:
> Even churches that don't support one view over another don't bother to
> address the faith-shaking issues that college kids will face: I can
> imagine many of those professors we heard at the conference skinning
> alive the believers in their classes. Churches do a good job of giving
> kids the spiritual tools they need for a fulfilling relationship with
> Jesus, helping them to steer their spiritual boat, so to speak, but they
> don't give them any intellectual tools. Steering the boat becomes moot if
> the the believer's boat is on the verge of sinking.
>
>I am not sure why youth directors don't perceive this need except that
>perhaps the kids themselves don't perceive it. In the warm embrace of
>their youth group, they aren't facing many intellectual challenges and so
>don't even know about the minefields that await them. Perhaps the
>majority of youth don't plan to do much thinking at college anyway. I
>don't know, but from your website and my own anecdotal experience, I
>think this is an issue that churches need to address.
The conference was a success as far as educating the Christian community but
not in the way that the organizers thought it would. This mother, who is a
home schooler is frustrated and scared by what Christian education is doing
to her children! And so should we all be scared.
glenn
Foundation, Fall and Flood
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm
Lots of information on creation/evolution
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Apr 27 2000 - 22:08:17 EDT