*I think the scientists at the Smithsonian were simply
embarassed about the Meyer publication, and were angry at
Sternberg over it.*
**
I think it goes deeper than that, and yes, I do think it was, in a
significant respect, at least for a few of the individuals involved, a
question of religious discrimination.
One of the difficult things about a case like this is that it involves a
question of intent. You can't really know another person's intent, and even
if you could, it's impossible to define a single "intent" behind most
actions -- people always act for mixed and often contradictory reasons --
and even if you could do that, a corporation or institution is made up of
disparate individuals who among them have mixed and contradictory motives.
At the end of the day, though, there's kind of an intuitive feel involved in
judging such a case. One question I would ask myself in defending this kind
of case is, "can a completely benign explanation be provided for the
allegedy discriminatory statement / action / policy, in a few sentences or
less, such that a typical battle-hardened mid-level employee from the jury
pool would find it instantly credible?" Or, more poetically, "if it stinks
like a fish, it's a fish."
On 3/27/07, drsyme@cablespeed.com <drsyme@cablespeed.com> wrote:
>
> > Having read some of the internal emails relating to the
> >Sternberg matter,
> > there's no doubt at all in my mind that some of his
> >superiors were out to
> > get him because of his creationist leanings. Simply no
> >doubt at all. In my
> > view, it's ludicrous to claim otherwise.
> >
> >
>
> But is that discrimination against religion? He denies
> being creationist first of all. But if he is a
> creationist, with all of the pseudoscientific baggage that
> brings, are they out of line to question Sternberg's
> motives?
>
> I think the scientists at the Smithsonian were simply
> embarassed about the Meyer publication, and were angry at
> Sternberg over it.
>
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Mar 27 09:10:20 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Mar 27 2007 - 09:10:20 EDT