Month: April 2009
New York Times Book Review Fears Intelligent Design Everywhere
NYT Book Review editor Gregory Cowles has attacked William Steig’s Yellow & Pink. It seems that not even children’s books are safe from Darwinian scrutiny at The New York Times.
Should Darwinists Receive Public Funds to Study Scientific Questions That the Public Is Not Permitted to Ask in Public Schools?
Atheist legal commentator Timothy Sandefur believes that the discussion of the weaknesses (in addition to the strengths) of Darwin’s theory of evolution in public schools is an unconstitutional violation of the Establishment Clause. Yet he sees no Establishment Clause problem with the public funding of research in evolutionary biology that asks the same questions that he believes are constitutionally proscribed in public schools. For example, Mr. Sandefur apparently believes that teaching public school students that there are large inadequately explained gaps in the fossil record is a violation of the Establishment Clause. Yet, as it happens, there is substantial publicly funded ongoing research being conducted by evolutionary biologists on these large inadequately explained gaps. Mr. Sandefur has no Establishment Clause Read More ›
Mr. Sandefur’s Illiberal Views
Timothy Sandefur has been waiting anxiously for my reply to his most recent post. He and I disagree on this point: I believe that teaching the strengths and weakness of Darwin’s theory in public schools is constitutional and is good science. He believes that teaching the strengths and weaknesses of Darwin’s theory is unconstitutional, and that only the strengths of Darwinism may be taught to schoolchildren. In his most recent post, he begins with three points. First, Mr. Sandefur asserts:
NPR Interview on Texas Evolution Decision Reveals Media Bias
Last week I did an interview with an NPR reporter, Bob Garfield, for his NPR show “On the Media” about the recent decision of the Texas State Board of Education to require critical analysis of evolution. I am used to hostile and skeptical questions from the media–and in fact I generally welcome good, hard discussions from reporters. But this reporter was particularly hostile and seemed to have an agenda to paint Darwin-skeptics like crazy religious fanatics. The final story lived up to its expectations. The Interview: A string of False Accusations and “How Dare You?” Type Questions The interview started with benign questions about the recent decision of the Texas State Board of Education to welcome scientific critique of evolution Read More ›
The End of Morality
Recently, David Brooks published a column titled “The End of Philosophy” in The New York Times (April 7, 2009). Brooks, long one of the most thoughtful writers in public life, addresses an ages-old tension over whether reason controls our moral intuitions and passions, or whether moral intuition/feeling is king and reason is only rationalization. In the latter view, Brooks says,