Three Threats to Science and Freedom?

On August 19 Scientific American published Michael Shermer's open letter to fellow atheists, in which he recommends a radical change in strategy. The suggestions are welcome, even though they are difficult to explain on any atheistic grounding (also here). The premise he begins with is doubtful, however:

"Since the turn of the millennium, a new militancy has arisen among religious skeptics in response to three threats to science and freedom: (1) attacks against evolution education and stem cell research; (2) breaks in the barrier separating church and state leading to political preferences for some faiths over others; and (3) fundamentalist terrorism here and abroad."

Threats (1) and (2) are seriously overstated if not just wrong.

"Attacks" against evolution education may be illustrated by the Dover School Board's ill-advised plan to use Of Pandas and People as a supplementary resource. Other than local, limited actions of that nature, ID proponents generally urge that evolution be taught, and thoroughly, including those aspects of nature that have so far been difficult to explain through evolutionary theory. That's not an attack. (More on the education issue here.)

"Attacks" on stem cell research are not necessarily anti-science, any more than "attacks" on Joseph Mengele's human subjects research is necessarily anti-science. The medical and psychological research communities have strong ethical limits on human subjects research; are they anti-science? One can oppose a specific line of immoral activity without having any objection to science itself, and without standing in the way of "science." Embryonic stem cell research (ESCR) is not the same thing, identical to, "science." It's just one line of research, with real moral implications. Shermer and others say the moral implications are irrelevant or unimportant. Fine. What they cannot and should not say that their opponents on the question are opposed to science. That's not where the disagreement lies. It's easy to demonstrate that with a thought experiment: suppose Shermer were to come to agreement that ESCR were immoral. Would he then support ESCR? Probably not. That would be a change of policy on his part. Would his change of policy be motivated by antipathy toward science? Hardly. It would be a moral issue. Let's not confuse the issue by saying it's about "science."

(By the way, I don't know of anybody who is opposed to "stem cell research," as he disingenuously put it. Some of us are opposed to embryonic stem cell research.)

"Breaks in the barrier separating church and state"--now, just where is that supposed to be happening? In Dover? Just what are Christians in particular doing wrong? It appears to me that we are making our case for our position via normal democratic processes. Is it wrong for Christians to vote for politicians who agree with our social or moral positions? Is it wrong for politicians with those positions to vote accordingly? Just what is the threat here?

Shermer's Threat (3) is a genuine threat. But where and from whom is it a threat? I didn't see the recent CNN series All God's Warriors, but the blogging on it has been informative. First, Joe Carter:

The three clips provided by CNN each highlighted one of the "fundamentalist" branches of the three Abrahamic faiths:

• God's Jewish Warriors: theocratic Israeli settlers, including the man who assassinated Yitzhak Rabin

• God's Muslim Warriors: theocratic British students, including the London subway bombers

• God's Christian Warriors: Jerry Falwell and Liberty University

Joe asks quite reasonably what these three all have in common. Harrison Scott Key has the same question:

"Let's see, which one of these people didn't murder someone?"

(Stand to Reason has more on this.)

Shermer's "threats" may apply somewhere, but not to many people of faith in the United States.

Posted: Sat - August 25, 2007 at 11:14 AM |

Thinking Christian by Tom Gilson getCategoryName("<$CategoryUUID$>");

Three Threats to Science and Freedom?

Thinking Christian by Tom Gilson