Last Sunday, at
the church, I was very tired. I could tell, I would definitely doze off if the
minister started a sermon. Instead, he turned on a video, warning it would be
an academic and scholarly one. Yeah, it was, but the provoking content was more
than enough to keep me awake. Actually, I was furious.
"Freedom to follow the evidence, wherever it leads.”
Sure thing, isn’t it?
What else a scientist should follow, then? Surprisingly, though, this natural
claim is not protected in current academic world.
This is the Era of
Darwin. Anyone who disagree the evolution theory is literally ostracized from
the academic world. There is a theory called ‘intellectual design’- a theory
that says the world is not just made out of mud and lightening, not by a
coincidence, but that it is a product of a higher intelligence. Seemed highly
unlikely to me, since I’m not a devout Christian, but what people believe is up
to them: it is not a matter other people can interfere with. However, scientists
who mention that theory are losing their jobs and being denied publications,
even the ones of high reputations.
As I watched this
movie, what I felt was- more than skepticism of the evolution theory itself, as
the minister intended- skepticism of my blind trust for science. I have already
learned that science is not always right and that the most fundamental basis
for all scientific theories can be completely wrong, like Aristotle or Newton.
Just because I learned in textbooks, though, I forgot to question the theory. I
accepted it by heart.
For an example of a
wrong scientific hypothesis, there is global warming. Once in science class,
our teacher told us that global warming is not a fact. It is merely a theory,
one that is highly unlikely, actually: he said that the rise of temperature is
due to circulation of Sun’s energy, not human’s actions. Still, they are
teaching it like a verified fact. Why? -to get advantage, of course! If
emission of carbon dioxide is banned by such theories, the developing countries
would not be able to develop the industry, thus depending on the already
developed countries.
It was the painful
truth. Science is not always true. And even if the scientists know the truth,
they don’t always tell the truth. They even block people from free speech. What
can I trust, really?
I have to be honest. I disagree on both issues you bring up. Global warming is real, and so is Darwinism. That is not to say that the sun isn't helping global warming and that there isn't a God up in the sky tinkering with earthly existence, but it's also not to say that there is. We can believe both at the same time, and neither are wrong until they say the other is completely wrong. I do believe there is "intelligent design" but I don't believe we can assign human characteristics to "it." By "it" I mean God - and that whole "in his own image" thing. Human existence often assumes, naturally, that it is the "be all and end all." We are the kings. We are supremely designed creatures at the center of the universe. But how do we know that? We don't. Mathematically, the universe is massive and essentially we don't matter at all. If the universe is a refrigerator, we aren't even the mold growing on a block of cheese. We are less than that.
ReplyDeleteAnyways, I also teach debate, and if you ever end up in my debate class we will be watching that video. This was a fun read. I hope Namdo joins in.