HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
July 28, 2005 Imagine a Harvard mathematics professor, respected among peers as a leading theorist and author of numerous groundbreaking dissertations, who, every Sunday, went to a Tarot card reader and believed – unequivocally, absolutely, in-his-guts believed – everything she said would come true, and altered his life accordingly. Imagine, too, the District Attorney of New York, a veteran of the evidentiary process of discovery and an unflinching proponent of the modern ideal that the accused are innocent unless proven guilty beyond all reasonable doubt, who, in the evenings every other Thursday, presides over a meeting of Raelians and insists that the human race was created by alien scientists who will soon whisk us away in their ship to the stars. Finally, consider a run-of-the-mill religious American – a homemaker, perhaps, or a firefighter – who does his/her job with integrity, is a good mother/father, and attends church every Sunday. What does this ordinary American have in common with the mathematician and attorney? It is the ability to split one’s brain right down the middle. The rational, I’ll-believe-it-when-I-see-it half guides this person’s actions at all times except for two hours or so on Sundays, at which point the uncritical, gullible half takes over. How is this possible? What allows an engineer on the one hand to be a critical examiner of evidence at all other times, and on the other hand to walk into a church and pick up scripture that makes claims about virgin births, resurrected saviors, physically impossible miracles – and to accept them, in his heart, without question? Is this a gift, or a curse? Atheists and agnostics can’t do this. If evidence guides us during the day, it also guides us at night. We can’t shift gears. Interestingly, many fundamentalists are also handicapped in the same manner. In their case, it is faith that guides them always, even if it means certain death (for example, withholding medical treatment for a dying child). I am reminded of an article penned by the eminent Oxford biologist Richard Dawkins. He related the story of a Harvard-educated geologist and deeply religious Christian named Kurt Wise. One day, Mr. Wise decided to go through his Bible and literally tear apart the pages that he would have to reject if evolution were true. At the end of this exercise, there was so little left of his Bible that “. . . try as I might, and even with the benefit of intact margins throughout the pages of Scripture, I found it impossible to pick up the Bible without it being rent in two. I had to make a decision between evolution and Scripture. Either the Scripture was true and evolution was wrong or evolution was true and I must toss out the Bible. . . . It was there that night that I accepted the Word of God and rejected all that would ever counter it, including evolution. With that, in great sorrow, I tossed into the fire all my dreams and hopes in science.” Kind of sad and pathetic, isn’t it? Because Mr. Wise lacked the ability to dichotomize his brain, he had to make a choice, and chose Scripture. Most telling is his final thought on the matter: “Although there are scientific reasons for accepting a young earth, I am a young-age creationist because that is my understanding of the Scripture. As I shared with my professors years ago when I was in college, if all the evidence in the universe turns against creationism, I would be the first to admit it, but I would still be a creationist because that is what the Word of God seems to indicate. Here I must stand.” Amazingly, I find myself sharing something in common with Mr. Wise; that is, the utter inability to think in diametrically opposed manners. Whereas he unconditionally follows Scripture, I follow evidence. If all the evidence in the universe turned against evolution, however, I would not be an evolutionist. I may lack the ability to turn off my critical thinking, but I am not close-minded enough to alter my beliefs when the evidence compels such alteration. Mr. Wise, on the other hand, admits that no amount of evidence will ever alter his belief in the Word of God. As a rationalist, I find this type of thinking absurd. As a matter of fact, it leaves me speechless. But I must at least credit Mr. Wise for his convictions. He is not a waffler. I therefore feel a greater kinship with him than I do with most religious Americans, including my fictional Harvard Professor and District Attorney. How they get through life adhering to such doublethink is beyond me. Maybe one of you can enlighten me. ------------ About the author: David Gleeson is an aerospace engineer and hard-core skeptic. He is married and has two daughters, ages 7 and 8. Email: coskeptic@mac.com Tell a friend about this site! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com. Please link to this article rather than copying and pasting it onto your site (which would be unauthorized and illegal). |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
