Sunday Morning Thought Piece
Sunday, May 27, 2012 at 9:56AM I spent a wonderful two hours yesterday evening with my 15 year old daughter and her oldest pal, we were discussing ‘why we are here’ and ‘belief’ and the theory of evolution.
As the discussion developed, the realisation hit me that this girl, who attends a fee paying Catholic school, has been taught that there are two ‘belief systems’ that might explain where we come from and why we’re here.
The question she asked me that sparked the whole thing off was;
‘So, do you believe in evolution Robert?’
This single question revealed everything about her education. On the one hand is the traditional Christian belief that God made the heavens and the earth, the other is belief in evolution.
Unlike the truly barking mad evangelical nutbags in many American schools who set out to prove evolution is the work of Satan or some other such fear based patriarchal mental torture, her British religious education is clearly far more subtle.
Two ‘belief systems’, one written down on clay tablets by the newly powerful males of an ancient desert dwelling tribe 2-3 thousand years ago, one developed by countless scientists in a complex peer review process over the last 150 years.
She is clearly being taught that these two ideas have equal weight.
She is not taught that God made the earth 5 thousand years ago and gentle men in robes walked with Dinosaurs, her teachers fully accept that you have to be actually clinically insane to believe that… oh wait, that’s what is taught in many American schools.
She is taught that while science may answer many questions about the development of the world and all that lives upon it, God created the universe in ways that are too mysterious for us, mere mortals, to ever understand.
So I started to explain as best I could the difference between a theory and a belief. I explained how the theory of evolution was never written down as a law, it’s a theory which by its very nature is evolving, changing and developing as science allows us to investigate further.
I tried to explained the process, how peer reviewed science is more like a discussion, where arguments are based on research, how the discussion is by its nature very complex and detailed, how scientists don’t all agree with each other. I tried to give examples of how new research can develop new strands of the theory, new techniques like mapping the human genome make it possible for us to read our genetic heritage.
This young woman is bright, inquisitive and articulate, I’ve known her since she was 2. Her parents are well-educated, funny and charming people. They are practicing Catholics and clearly not bigots, racists or indeed homophobes. If they lived in the USA, they would not vote for Mitt Romney and would not support the Tea Party, and yet, I assume, they consider evolution to be a belief.
I think this is still a truly fundamental problem standing in the way of our development as a species. In no way am I saying that human investigation into spiritual experience and a greater understanding of self is in any way backward looking, but concrete, law based religious belief is the yoke the human race most needs to shed.
We now know the theory, not the belief, the very well supported theory the world is more than 5 thousand years old and that Dinosaurs died out quite a few million years before homo erectus emerged from the plains of central Africa. We know the theory, not belief that Homo sapiens are one species, many different cultures and languages but one single species. This is not based on laws written by a few old blokes sitting around a fire, but thousands of scientists who have spent lifetimes researching, cataloging and theorising on why birds have feathers, fish have gills and human beings have language.
(photo Jim Harrison 2003)
The two time Pulitzer Prize winning sociobiologist Edward O. Wilson wrote a book called ‘Creation’ in which he held out a friendly hand to religious leaders, claiming that together science and religion could further human understanding, so we can possibly assume he’s not a Dawkinite.
Wilson said recently that he believes there will be a decline in organised religion in the coming century and a lot less emphasis upon idealistic ideologies, (despite what’s happening in America) we’ll see a need to focus on conflict resolution and work out how to get along with each other, but the biggest stumbling block is
‘the creation story.’
‘That’s the killer, the creation story.” Said Wilson, “like it’s set in stone and people have to have complete fidelity to the creation story of their tribe, and if you question that creation story, with something like evolution then they get offended and they get hostile because you are attacking their tribe.’
I’m very grateful I’d heard him say that as yesterday evening I tried to introduce the notion of the theory off evolution without making it an attack on anything, rather something that required further investigation.
Reader Comments (10)
It is very easy to trick a human being. It is no less easy to trick many at the same time. How much of what you know is actually false? You'll never know until you question it and its presuppositions. I read Wittgenstein's "On Certainty" and it gave me a new found belief in scepticism of EVERYTHING.
An excellent blog. My daughters all attend Catholic schools (though I myself am not). They are extremely open about the world and just last Halloween they discussed Samhain and explained that the event isn't evil and talked on why they did it.
The teachers themselves too have level heads on their shoulders and are more than happy to be unbiased in discussions.
To be honest it showed me that not all Catholics are crazy screaming Bible banging fools...though some are and I've met them too.
-----
'The Songs of Distant Earth' (Arthur C Clarke) where they discuss what literature is allowed to survive. All Holy Books were not.
"...despite all their wealth and beauty they didn't want to reinfect virgin planets with ancient poisons of religious hatred and belief in the supernatural, and the pious gibberish with which countless billions of men and women have once comforted themselves at the cost of addling their minds."
Interesting think piece, and well-timed, but while I'm glad you wrote it, your daughter's friend may simply have fallen victim to sloppy phrasing - one might believe that evolution is the theory that best explains the evidence, without "believing in" Evolution as one believes in God.
Bobby, I can tell you that as an American Catholic and a catechist, what we teach is that God is the creator of everything and evolution is our best attempt to explain some of how he did it. That may not be true of all Catholics, but it is the stance of the church in the U.S. There really is no war between science and religion in the Catholic Church, it exists mostly between science and religious fundamentalist and is partly driven by atheistic scientist themselves.
Heh. I guess you can call me a "Dawkinite," Bobbert. I suggest that you give your daughter's friend a copy of his The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution. It's a wonderful, fascinating read!
As for those who try to assert that science and religion are compatible, it is high time you woke up and smelled the reality. After all, you are already atheists yourselves: you don't believe in Thor or Apollo, Shiva or Neptune, Tiki or Huitzilopochtli, Baal or Chac. Why not let go of the particular fairy tale you were indoctrinated with and go one god further?
Well, as I've said to my UK friends before, you all got to send your religious nutters to the Colonies centuries ago, and they've been breeding here and making life difficult by trying to control the rest of us, since. LOL (but, I am somewhat serious here).
I was always given to understand that one shouldn't give creationism and evolution equal weight, actually; one is an unsubstantiated belief, the other is scientific method. Which, a belief is fine so long as one doesn't try to legislate it for others ... which happens too much here in the U.S. I was raised Christian at one time, but never took offense at facts which didn't agree with our mythology - I just assumed there was a way they could coexist. That was before I aged and understood politics and power bases, though.
Great blog! This sparked a good discussion between me and my husband, Tommy. Studying world religions is a hobby for Tommy. At the same time, he is one of the most logical, practical, inquisitive people I know. “Doubting” Thomas questions everyone and everything. As I tweeted you – he has made deacons cry and priests curse with his questions and logic.
In the end, religion and science aren’t mutually exclusive. Theology is a study of “things divine” and can be considered a “science” in its own right. The commonality between religion and science is faith. I have faith that atoms exist, although I’ve never seen one. I have faith there is a higher power, even though I’ve never encountered him/her/them/it in a tangible form which I can present: “God, meet everybody. Everybody… God”.
Tommy and I have both experienced Catholic school and public school education in America. We don’t remember the creationism/evolution topic as a major issue in either. I think, Tommy was too busy debating his stance on confession with the priests to worry about it (I believe his question at age 7 was; why do we have a “middle man”, why can’t I talk to God directly?)
Why can’t creationism and evolution both be right? Why can’t I believe there is something greater that created us, but that creation happened over time. The stories of The Bible (etc.) were written for the audience of its day; for people who wouldn’t have had the science to understand the world as we do now – or will in the future.
Maybe C.S. Lewis was right. Maybe Douglas Adams was right. Maybe Stephen Hawking has it right. Then again, maybe Grant/Naylor has it “right” and, as Kryten explained to Lister: “Human heaven? Goodness me! Humans don't go to heaven! No, someone made that up to prevent you all from going nuts!” Or maybe Mr. Collier from Sunday school had it right: “Of course cats go to heaven. Where else would they get the strings for the harps?”
There are many theories in both science and religion but, as Tommy says: “Everyone believes in something. Even atheists believe in nothing.”
In the meantime, I have to go pray to St. Anthony to help me find my car keys so my scientific combustion engine can propel me to earning a living tomorrow.
Hmmm. maybe... those 9/11 highjackers had it right also...? After all, their faith was so absolute that they were willing to sacrifice their own lives --and others' lives-- to fulfill their god's wishes.
Yes, I'm being facetious, but it helps hit home my stance that what ultimately matters is truth --verified by cold, hard facts, evidence that would stand up in a court of law.
For example, I don't merely "believe" in atoms: I am 99.9% convinced that they exist, even though I have never seen them. Why? Because there is evidence of their existence, from x-rays to electrons, hydrogen bombs to nuclear power plants, let alone the fusion energy that powers our sun.
Unproven "beliefs," no matter how sincere or even "private," have real consequences for real people in the real world. I have been contemplating those affects lately while answering queries as to whether or not Mitt Romney's Mormonism really matters.
As I've thought more about the question asked by the friend of Robert's daughter, I think I would have answered with a similar question: "So do you believe the earth is flat?" After all, literally millions of people believed that for thousands and thousands of years. Don't the "two belief systems" --one that it's flat, another that it's round-- have equal weight?
I would say that this would be the most likely to be accurate interpretation of the scenario.
While I have other complaints about the Catholic Church, this is true; I have never received any grief about being a died-in-the-wool evolutionist from Catholics, just from protestants who somehow think I should follow their doctrine or be harassed for not. As a tangential aside, the same applies to my being a pagan. Fundies of any sort (including 'atheistic scientist' fundies) seem to do little more than foment conflict. This is not to say that I Have any problem with Christianity, just the overly vocal minority who think their views should be enforced upon others.
I am by the Grace of God a Catholic Christian in communion with the Bishop of Rome. I am American political conservative, Tea Party supporter, likely will vote for Romney and I believe Evolution is compatible with religious belief and belief in God.
The whole issue is unremarkable to me.
In theory a Catholic can support Young Earth Creationism (& YEC Catholics exist) but they are not allowed to assert it as dogma.