The recent media coverage of a book being sold at a Grand Canyon shop has got me thinking about the science vs. religion debate again (article). It was a subject of conversation at a party I went to last night and my sister has already written a bit about it.
There are a few things that upset me about this debate. First of all, scientists are often as stubborn and closed minded about new ideas that change their worldview as religious fundamentalists. It wasn't until the 1960's that plate tectonics began to be taken seriously. Geologists were staunchly defending contraction theory against this "heresy" for decades. I often wonder if we would have better earthquake and volcanic eruption prediction if scientists had begun looking at the scientific merits of plate tectonics in the 1910's and 1920's rather than defending their egos.
Another problem with the science vs. religion debate is more problematic. There are a number of people who take certain religious documents literally. This number actually appears to be growing within the Evangelical Christian community (at least when it suits them to interpret the Bible literally). When I think of the creation story, I don't literally believe that Adam was the first man on earth. I think of him as the earliest man on earth whose descendants remembered him long enough to write his story down. I don't really see it as the dawn of man biologically, but I do see it as the beginning of civilization. Many in the Christian community these days would call me a heretic and an unbeliever for holding these views. Many who hold my views think that those who interpret the Bible more literally are incapable of independent thought. (I personally do not agree with them).
The last problem with the science vs. religion debate is that people do not understand the difference between the two disciplines. Yes, science and religion have very different ideas about where the universe came from and what our place is in it. But one of the main reasons for the difference in their "answers to life's big questions" is that they have been asking completely different questions. Science asks, "By what mechanisms was the earth created?" Religion asks, "How was the earth created and why?" Of course there are going to be entirely different answers to these questions because they are different questions.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that religion should stop trying to apply its answers to science and science should stop trying to apply its answers to religion. There was a very clever episode of The Simpsons called "Lisa the Skeptic" in it Judge Snyder rules, "... as for science vs. religion I'm issuing a restraining order..." A wise ruling indeed.
This was forwarded to me by an old friend.
A Day in the Life of Joe Republican
Joe gets up at
6 a.m. and fills his coffeepot with water to prepare his
morning coffee. The water is clean and good because some tree-hugging
liberal fought for minimum water-quality standards. With his first
swallow of coffee, he takes his daily medication. His medications are
safe to take because some stupid commie liberal fought to insure their
safety and that they work as advertised.
All but $10 of his medications are paid for by his employer's medical
plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid
medical insurance - now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning
breakfast, bacon and eggs. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some
girly-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.
In the morning shower, Joe reaches for his shampoo. His bottle is
properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total
contents because some crybaby liberal fought for his right to know what
he was putting on his body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks
outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because
some environmentalist wacko liberal fought for laws to stop industries
from polluting our air. He walks to the subway station for his
government-subsidized ride to work. It saves him considerable money in
parking and transportation fees because some fancy-pants liberal fought
for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the
opportunity to be a contributor.
Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical
benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some lazy
liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joes
employer pays these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his
employees to call the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes
unemployed, he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment check
because some stupid liberal didn't think he should lose his home because
of his temporary misfortune.
Its noontime and Joe needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some
bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FDIC because some
godless liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers
who ruined the banking system before the Great Depression.
Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market
federal student loan because some elitist liberal decided that Joe and
the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more
money over his lifetime.
Joe is home from work. He plans to visit his father this evening at his
farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive. His car is
among the safest in the world because some America-hating liberal fought
for car safety standards. He arrives at his boyhood home. His was the
third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers' Home
Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans. The
house didn't have electricity until some big-government liberal stuck
his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification.
He is happy to see his father, who is now retired. His father lives on
Social Security and a union pension because some wine-drinking,
cheese-eating liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe
wouldn't have to.
Joe gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk
show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and
conservatives are good. He doesn't mention that the beloved Republicans
have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout
his day.
Joe agrees: "We don't need those big-government liberals ruining our
lives! After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take
care of themselves, just like I have."
If you've been wondering why this hasn't been updated in a couple of weeks it's because I've had jury duty. That's right! Even a girl with opinions can be picked for a jury. It was a tough case to hear and it was hard to make the right decision. Someone killed the baby. It was one of the parents whether they did it intentionally or not. However the prosecutor had no evidence that it was the man that they charged for the crime. We couldn't convict. I guess it's better to let a criminal go free than to see an innocent person serve time. I'm not saying he did it. I really don't know...
As many of you know the Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh's Main Branch in Oakland has been undergoing renovations for a while. Earlier this month the first floor of the library re-opened after most of it had been closed for renovations for the better part of the last year. Today I visted that library for the first time since the renovations were unveiled.
I don't like it much. It's nothing like the library I learned to love as I was growing up. The first thing to go was the antique Westinghouse elevator. It was old, shaky and many people were deathly afraid of it. I loved it. Where the old elevator shaft was is the new check-out desk, but now it's called CUSTOMER SERVICE. Last time I checked libraries had patrons not customers. You'd think that professional librarians would know this.
The Gillespie Room is also gone. It has been replaced with a "Crazy Mocha" coffee shop. The main room on the floor is laid out more like a Barnes and Noble than a library. The bookshelves are not arranged efficiently but more like they are there to promote the latest bestsellers.
Oh well. I guess I'm getting too old for the library.
I had a pretty good Banned Books Week. I hope you did too. I purchased an Isabel Allende book for the occasion, but haven't finished it yet (it's the Spanish language edition so it'll take me a while to finish it up). I also re-read my copy of Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury. I don't know that it was a banned book but it's a story about banning books so... it fits.
I also got to share some "banned books" with the students I work with. I read them Dr. Seuss' The Lorax (Removed from libraries and schools in logging areas). I also read them a story by request on Friday. Of all the stories we had available, they picked "Hanzel and Gretel." I didn't even mention it as an option but it was in our big book of fairy tales.
I also realize we have a long way to go to end book censorship. The teacher that I'm assisting in the room read "Jack and the Beanstalk" on Thursday. Great story. But I noticed that she read something a little differently. She always said "Fee Fi Foe Fum I smell an Englishman" instead of the traditional "Fee Fi Fo Fum I smell the blood of an Englishman." She also omitted the part about grinding his bones up for his bread. I thought it was a bit odd, but I thought that was just how this book had it printed. Turns out there was a direction on our activity plan to censor the story. Oh the shame!
I also stumbled across this article on the UK Guardian. It really makes me worry about the future of education in this country.
The Books that Texas Banned.