Keep Your Mouth Shut So We Won’t Know What An Idiot You Are
Robert McHenry, Former Editor in Chief of Encyclopædia Britannica on Bush’s promotion of “Intelligent” Design:
I have some sympathy for President Bush. Despite attending some pretty good schools, he evidently was not taught science in any meaningful way. On the other hand, he's had ample time to supply the defect in his education. But it is a rule of human behavior that we supply only those defects that we recognize and feel to be such. The President, like all of us, has attended to some defects and left others alone.
One of the defects of democracy is that we usually have quite ordinary persons as our leaders. Sometimes this doesn't matter; their particular defects don't bear upon public affairs, or the times are sufficiently placid that it just doesn't matter that they drink, or play too much poker, or cultivate friends of doubtful character, or whatever.
These are not such times. The President's ignorance of science might have remained a private matter, but he chose to speak on the subject of evolution and "intelligent design." This is a great pity.
Science -- from the loftiest of theorizing (like that of Einstein or, oh, Darwin) through the conducting of painstakingly difficult experiments to the application of new knowledge to the improvement of human life -- science, I say, is the chief engine of our society. The great bulk of business entrepreneurs so celebrated in certain circles as the movers and shakers have made their marks by exploiting the knowledge gained by scientists.
Even its opponents grant the prestige and accomplishments of science by pretending to do science themselves, whether in the form of "e-meters" that turn galvanic skin responses into signs of mystic energy flows in the body or in that of ID, which artfully turns "unknown" into "unknowable" in a flourish of bad math and illogic.
It is the case that some people don't like where the engine is taking us, indeed, don't want to go anywhere at all. History affords examples of such people and offers a proper model: the Amish. They made their decision in the 17th century to get off the train, and they have lived peaceably ever since, surrounded but largely unaffected by the Industrial Revolution and all that has followed. Unfortunately, our present-day reluctant passengers seem not to want simply off the train. They want the train to stop and for the rest of us to accept their terms. If President Bush has not taken quite so radical a position, he has certainly decided to take a turn walking down the tracks in front of the train, waving a little red flag.
Here is where we must rely on the strength of democracy. A minority, however vocal, cannot impose its will on the rest of us if we decline to permit it. Not even if the President seems to side with them; he is, after all, merely the first among equals, and he will not own that flag much longer.
Science, he says, is the chief engine of our society. I think that's true as well, but the majority of people in this country would disagree - they would cite God as the engine that has driven America to prominence. They thank God for everything, be it prosperity, health, or scoring a touchdown. And while I may disapprove of crediting God for everything good, I might be able to understand it better if they actually blamed Him when things go wrong.
I think the key here is that science is under-appreciated, whereas God can literally get away with murder. Conclusion? Science needs a better press agent.
Jason Ginsburg at August 12, 2005 10:26 AM
Did anyone else see the news yesterday when they were covering the opening of the new Intelligent Design museum?
I didn't know this, but apparantly Noah actually placed dinosaurs on the ark, and allowed them to get off (after the flood) first, whereupon they died out. This clearly explains why the earth is only 10,000 years old AND the existence of dinosaurs. Quit being such a skeptic Amy.
eric at August 12, 2005 11:39 AM
"...the majority of people in this country would disagree - they would cite God as the engine that has driven America to prominence."
Gee, it's hard to find any scientific or objective evidence in that post to back up that statement, no?
Dmac at August 12, 2005 12:13 PM
They cited on ABC News World Tonight last night that 45% of Americans believe the earth and the universe was created by god around 10,000 years ago. Scary.
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Beliefs/story?id=1030003&page=1
check out the video- the Adam and Eve exhibit is, well, um, amazing.
eric at August 12, 2005 12:27 PM
Thanks for the link, Eric. Interesting Gallup data, and the figure given, while not a majority, is not too far off.
Faith is a problematic thing for many of us - you either believe various tenets or you don't. I personally feel that Intelligent Design is strictly voodoo, but we've always had a significant portion of the country who believe otherwise. As long as it doesn't invade our public schools, I can live with it.
Dmac at August 12, 2005 12:43 PM
"Gee, it's hard to find any scientific or objective evidence in that post to back up that statement, no?"
I was giving an educated opinion. I'm not here to do research for you. (What is this anyway? JAMA?) But if you insist on evidence to back up my statement, I refer you to the election results of Bush v Kerry. We live in a nation of Bible thumpers and he is thumper-in-chief.
Jason Ginsburg at August 12, 2005 12:43 PM
In the last presidential election, 8% of voters gave "religious faith" as their number one issue in deciding who to vote for. That puts it behind all of these: Cares About People (9%), Honest/Trustworthy (11%), Strong Leader (17%), Will Bring Change (24%), and Clear Stand on Issue (17%), but ahead of "Intelligent".
Catholics narrowly preferred Bush to Kerry (53-47), Jews preferred Kerry to Bush, and "Other" religions preferred Kerry to Bush, as did "None". Bush got the Protestant and Catholic vote, Kerry got Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, and Atheists.
See the poll for yourself and learn.
Richard Bennett at August 12, 2005 2:34 PM
The 45% of Americans who accept young earth creationism were probably educated in public schools.
These people base their belief on the Bible, a book they believe to be divinely inspired. I like to tell them that if God can inspire the Old Testament 3000 years ago and the New Testament 2000 years ago, he certainly could have inspired "Origin of Species" and most likely did. Then I tell them they're Satanists who should be burned at the stake for spreading heresy. They don't like that, but I do.
Richard Bennett at August 12, 2005 2:40 PM
Jason -
Congratulations, you've just demonstrated a complete lack of curiosity and knowledge about the very subject you pontificate so passionately about. But, let's take your incoherent logic a step further, shall we? -
Voters for Bush are all Bible - thumping morons;
Voters for Kerry are all atheistic, rational thinking human beings.
One little problem with this nuanced approach: all Pew and Gallup exit surveys told a completely different story than your Daily Kos talking points.
You could at least give the appearance of being rational when you make your arguments, rather than just venting your spleen. I believe that's what our hostess advocates here on a daily basis.
Dmac at August 12, 2005 3:30 PM
Dmac -
"Pontificate" - bonus scrabble points for you! But no points for all the words you've tried to put in my mouth. Really, I don't need you to take my "logic a step forward", especially when you have no idea which way to go.
Rely on polls all you want, even though I don't think they're reliable, as I don't believe that people are honest when strangers ask them questions about their politics. But no poll will change the fact that Bush was elected by the Bible Belt (you know, all of those red states in the center of the country?)
Yeah, I'm sure that there are a handful of atheists who voted for Bush, just like there are probably a handful of Chinese who hate Chinese food. But all of Bush's base is hardcore Christian, which is why he keeps preaching to that choir.
Jason Ginsburg at August 12, 2005 5:16 PM
On the one hand Mr. Ginsburg says: "Science is the chief engine of our society" and on the other he says "no poll will change the fact that Bush was elected by the Bible Belt".
Tsk, tsk, Mr. Ginsburg. There is no science without data, and if you feel it's OK to pull conclusions out of your ass when the data don't agree with your theory you're no better than a Creationist. Bush took all the states except the West Coast, the Northeast, and part of the Midwest, including places like New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada, Ohio, the Dakotas, and West Virginia that are normally Democratic states. There aren't really all that many Bible-pounders in the US, certainly not enough to account for 51% of the electorate.
Kindly conform your theories to what the facts will support.
Richard Bennett at August 12, 2005 5:37 PM
Richard- right now I'd buy you a beer.
Tommorrow we'll probably see the Israelis and Palestinians holding an early Octoberfest.
eric at August 12, 2005 6:57 PM
"I think the key here is that science is under-appreciated, whereas God can literally get away with murder. Conclusion? Science needs a better press agent."
Hilarious. And too true.
Amy Alkon at August 12, 2005 7:20 PM
I'll have a Newcastle, dude.
Richard Bennett at August 12, 2005 11:59 PM
The only point I'm trying to make is that America is a very religious country, especially when compared with other Western nations, with the vast majority of our citizens being Christians.
Of course, I know that those Christians run a whole gamut from people who only celebrate Christmas to people who chain themselves to abortion clinics. That being said, the majority of Christians do go to church regularly, do pray to God and give thanks to him on a regular basis, and did vote for George W. Bush, a Bible-thumper if there ever was one - hence my belief that this is a Christian nation and Bush is the head priest.
My statement that a majority of Americans value religion over science is supported by the fact that our leader, elected by a majority of Americans, (A) thinks there's room for both evolution and creationism in the classroom, (B) is against allowing meaningful stem cell research, and (C) makes every effort to incorporate faith into government programs, regardless of its effectiveness.
Feel free to disagree with my opinion, but it's ridiculous for you to argue that it's without basis. Just because I don't feel like going around the internet and collecting research to justify everything I post, doesn't mean that what I assert is a conclusion pulled out of my ass. Unlike some of us, I don't spend all day scouring the internet for sources that support my personal views, then posting them in an unimaginative blog. No, instead I'm going to go jog in the park, read a book, then take my wife to a baseball game. Have a great one!
Jason Ginsburg at August 13, 2005 6:54 AM
Good for you, Jason. But again, stating that something is true just because you say it is doesn't really constitute a valid point - nor is trying to link two disparate ideas make a valid argument. That's all I was trying to get across here - and to add, God Bless You.
Hey, I keed, I keed!
Dmac at August 13, 2005 7:55 AM
You can put lipstick on a possum, but it's still a possum. Creationism isn't science, even with a science-y sounding makeover.
deja pseu at August 13, 2005 9:25 AM
Ignoring creationism in the schools is the worst possible thing you can do. Creationists are well organized and well funded. Their arguments against evolution can sound very plausable to the average uninformed individual. It's like they say about sex education--if kids aren't learning it in schools then they're gonna learn about it on the streets. God only knows what they'll learn out on the street.
Also, people can have a faith in God and still be scientists. And there have been plenty of stupid pseudo-scientific theories to come out of communist ideology as well. Stupidity is not reserved to religious types.
nash at August 13, 2005 1:22 PM
Leave a comment