Tuesday, January 2, 2007

What I Missed While Out of Town

I have been on hiatus [left on the 20th, got back last night] whilst traveling about Old Dominion. I had a great Christmas break and hope everyone else has as well.

I see I missed another spate at scienceblogs between Ed and PZ. This time, the spate arose over Dawkins' endorsement (and retraction thereof) of a petition. Same old shit, different day.

(A) What's the best thing for science education?
(B) What's the best thing to counter religious fundamentalism?
(C) What's more important to counter, if the answers to those two questions are mutually exclusive?

On the side of rationalism, people want to divide neatly into two major camps: 1) Genie Scott, Nick Matzke, Wesley Elsberry and Ed Brayton... 2) PZ Myers, Larry Moran, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris...

These same people argue that (1) is only concerned with (A) and holds enough antipathy towards (B) to have no hesitation in answering (C). They argue the same for (2) with respect to (B) over (A).

I don't know if such a simple bifurcation is possible. However, let's just go along with it to make things easier. I think we all know that (A) is largely a subset of the overarching problem of (B). I think what we all don't know is whether or not it is possible/laudable/feasible/advisable to take on (B) with scientific authority, ie bringing a unified group of vocal public science authorities to bear against religious fundamentalism with publications and talks.

None of those people in camp (1) are fans of religious fundamentalism, and I am sure all would love to see the dissolution of such mindsets. What they fear, I think, is linking science with anti-religion. People in (2) may argue that this dichotomy (science/religion) has already happened in culture and been solidified in the fundy mindset. People in (1) may counter that science is neither philosophically equipped nor morally normative for such an endeavor as (B).

In this age in which we live, is the greatest danger we face lack of science education, or religious fundamentalism? Is one the cause of the other, or the effect? If we can't agree on those two questions, then perhaps the categories may be accurate, after all.

I hope cooler heads prevail, that PZ and Ed realize they're fighting on the same side against irrationalism, and that more focus is put upon these latter two questions and more focus is put upon (C).
________________
Technorati tags: , ,