Monday, July 15, 2013

Gonzalez Won't Teach ID

Guillermo Gonzalez has made a public attestation that he will not teach intelligent design at Ball State University.  As the Muncie Star Press reports:
Gonzalez, who was hired by BSU this summer as an assistant professor in the department of physics and astronomy, is best known for his advocacy of intelligent design.

“As I communicated to members of the department during my interviews, I plan to continue my research on astrobiology and stellar astrophysics,” Gonzalez said in a statement issued this week.

The statement reported that he will not be discussing intelligent design in the classroom, and that he did not discuss intelligent design when he taught at Iowa State University, either
That may not be enough to soothe folks like Coyne and Harris but it is a huge step forward to placate the faculty at Ball State, I am sure. It is important for him to distance himself from the modern ID movement in this sense and for them to understand that. The anti-science comments made by the faculty at Iowa State are not without merit.

It is one thing for ID supporters to believe that the universe is created and guided by an intelligence. It is another for modern ID supporters to, having no theoretical constructs of their own, take pot shots at organized science in support of their ideas.  At least "mainstream" creationism, warts and all, has a testable framework. You can test the hypothesis "the earth was created six-thousand years ago." That's easy. Trying to test the hypothesis "God created the heavens and the earth," That's hard.  Add to that the fact that the public face of ID as purveyed by people like David Klinghoffer, Cornelius Hunter, William Dembski and David Berlinski is rabidly "anti-Darwinian," and you have a science credibility problem.  Gonzalez is wise to stay well away from that. 

1 comment:

  1. Hello,

    I write from Italy. Here the Church itself, starting from Pope John Paul II, officially agrees with theistic evolutionism. And in the Italian schools the only science that is taught is the modern one, with darwinian evolution being considered correct and not antithetic to religion.
    After all, Darwin himself, despite being an atheist, said that his theory was not against the belief in God.

    I wrote a book that has been published this year also in the USA. I love the USA and the wonderful people that live there. But the reaction to my book, by some American Christians, surprised me: some of them wrote to me that I am not a real Christian if I really believe that modern science can give value to faith. And they also wrote that if I believe in Jesus Christ I must accept creationism.
    I really do not understand the logic of those reasonings, perhaps because in my country is quite normal to be a scientist (in modern, evolutionary science) and at the same time to be a practicing Christian.
    I do think that science can complete our faith and be a strong basis for it, by showing us the extraordinary power of our Creator, who is ruling an entire universe, and who was able to make life rise from the absence of life (by means of a process that humans call evolution...).

    Thank you.
    Corrado Ghinamo
    (Doctor in electronic engineering, author of "The Beautiful Scientist")

    ReplyDelete