Творение, эволюция и границы науки: дискуссия в Соединенных Штатах
Ключевые слова:
наука, религия, проблема демаркации, процесс Скоупса, Уильям Дженнинг Брайан, эволюция, Первая поправка к Конституции США, дело Эпперсон, младоземельный креационизм, дело Маклеан против Арканзаса, Майкл Руз, дело Эдвардс против Агиллара, Карл Поппер, разумный замысел, дело Тамми Китцмиллер против Школьного округа ДовераАннотация
Статья анализирует различные способы определения и защиты науки в ходе судебных дискуссий о правомерности преподавания теории эволюции и креационной науки в общественных школах США. Когда в начале 1920-х годов появилась первая организованная оппозиция теории эволюции, антиэволюционисты настаивали, что теорию эволюцию не следует преподавать, поскольку она, из-за ее гипотетического характера, не является научной. К последней четверти XX века, однако, они изменили свою тактику, доказывая, напротив, что креационизм и разумный замысел можно считать научными. Смена тактики была связана с изменением трактовки содержания американской Конституции, прежде всего ее Первой поправки, которая гласит: «Конгресс не должен издавать ни одного закона, относящегося к установлению религии». Дело в том, что до Второй мировой войны Верховный суд США ограничивал применение этой поправки уровнем федерального законодательства. Подобная практика начала меняться с конца 1940-х годов, когда Верховный суд начал применять ограничения, устанавливаемые Первой поправкой в отношении религии, на уровне отдельных штатов и государственных школьных округов точно так же, как в случае с 14-й поправкой; к началу 1960-х Верховный суд ставил своей целью выведение религии за пределы общественной образовательной системы. Поскольку обучение «плохой науке» не нарушает Конституцию, противники креационизма стремились доказать, что креационная наука и разумный замысел по существу являются религиозными доктринами - и, таким образом, их преподавание в общественных школах противоречит Конституции.Скачивания
Библиографические ссылки
Abney, Keith (1997) “Naturalism and Nonteleological Science: A Way to Resolve the Demarcation Problem between Science and Nonscience”, Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 49: 162-169.
Behe, Michael J. (1996) Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution. New York: Free Press.
Bruce, Robert V. (1987) The Launching of Modern American Science, 1846-1876. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Carnap, Rudolf (1936) “Testability and Meaning”, Philosophy of Science 3: 420-471. Daniels, George H. (1968) American Science in the Age of Jackson. New York: Columbia University Press.
Dembski, William A. (1996) “What Every Theologian Should Know about Creation”, The Princeton Theological Review
DeWolf, David K., Meyer, Stephen C. and DeForrest, Mark E. (1999) Intelligent Design in Public School Science Curricula: A Legal Guidebook. Richardson, TX: Foundation for Thought and Ethics
DeWolf, David K., Meyer, Stephen C. and DeForrest, Mark E. (2000) “Teaching the Origins Controversy: Science, or Religion, or Speech?”, Utah Law Review 1: 39-110
Fales, Evan “Animadversions on Kitzmiller v. Dover: Correct Ruling, Flawed Reasoning”
Gieryn, Thomas F. (1983) “Boundary-work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of Scientists”, American Sociological Review 48(6): 781-795.
Gieryn, Thomas F., Bevins, George M. and Zehr, Stephen C. (1985) “Professionalization of American Scientists: Public Science in the Creation/Evoution Trials”, American Sociological Review 50: 392-409.
Hogan, Tom (2010) “Some Implications of the Demise of the Demarcation Problem”, Creation Research Society Quarterly 46: 167-176.
Johnson, Phillip E. (1990 October) “Evolution as Dogma: The Establishment of Naturalism”, First Things.
Johnson, Phillip E. (1990) “The Origin of Species Revisited”, Constitutional Commentary 7: 427-434.
Johnson, Phillip E. (1994) “Foreword”, in J. P. Moreland (ed.) The Creation Hypothesis: Scientific Evidence for an Intelligent Designer. Downers Grove, IL.
Koperski, Jeffrey (2008) “Two Bad Ways to Attack Intelligent Design and Two Good Ones”, Zygon 43: 433-449.
Lakatos, Imre (1999) “Lecture One: The Demarcation Problem”, in Imre Lakatos and Paul Feyerabend For and Against Method, ed. Matteo Motterlini. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Larson, Edward J. (1997) “Afterword: The Evolution-Teaching Controversy Since Scopes”, in Larson, Edward J. Summer for the Gods: The Scopes Trial and America's Continuing Debate over Science and Religion. New York: Basic Books.
Larson, Edward J. (1997) Summer for the Gods: The Scopes Trial and America's Continuing Debate over Science and Religion. New York: Basic Books.
Larson, Edward J. (2003) Trial and Error: The American Controversy over Creation and Evolution, 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.
Larson, Edward J. (2004) Evolution: The Remarkable History of a Scientific Theory. New York: Modern Library.
Laudan, Larry (1983) “The Demise of the Demarcation Problem”, in R. S. Cohen and Larry Laudan (ed.) Physics, Philosophy, and Psychoanalysis, pp. 111-127. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel.
Laudan, Larry (1996) Beyond Positivism and Relativism: Theory, Method, and Evidence. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Luskin, Casey (2005, October 9) “Will Robert Pennock Become the Next Michael Ruse?”, Evolution News and Views .
Meyer, Stephen C. (2000) “The Demarcation of Science and Religion”, in Gary Ferngren et al. (eds) The History of Science and Religion in the Western Tradition. New York: Garland Publishing.
Monton, Bradley (2009) Seeking God in Science: An Atheist Defends Intelligent Design. Petersborough, ON: Broadview Press.
National Academy of Sciences (1998) Teaching About Evolution and the Nature of Science. Washington: National Academy Press.
National Academy of Sciences (2008) Science, Evolution and Creationism. Washington: National Academy Press.
Numbers, Ronald L. (1998) Darwinism Comes to America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Numbers, Ronald L. (2003) “Science without God: Natural Laws and Christian Beliefs”, in David C. Lindberg and Numbers, Ronald L. When Science and Christianity Meet, pp. 265-285. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Numbers, Ronald L. (2006) The Creationists: From Scientific Creationism to Intelligent Design, expended ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Numbers, Ronald L. (2009) “Aggressors, Victims, and Peacemakers: Historical Actors in the Drama of Science and Religion”, in Harold W. Attridge (ed.) The Science and Religion Debate: Why Does It Continue? New Haven: Yale University Press.
Pennock, Robert T. (2011) “Can't Philosophers Tell the Difference between Science and Religion?: Demarcation Revisited”, Synthese 178(2): 177-206.
Plantinga, Alvin (1996) “Methodological Naturalism?”, in Jitse M. van der Meer (ed.) Facets of Faith and Science, 2 vols. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
Plantinga, Alvin (1997, September) “Methodological Naturalism?”, Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 49: 143-154.
Plantinga, Alvin (2006, March 7) “Whether ID Is Science Isn't Semantics”, Science & Theology News.
Popper, Karl (1934) Logik der Forschung. Vienna: Springer.
Popper, Karl (1959) The Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Basic Books.
Popper, Karl (1976) Unended Quest: An Intellectual Autobiography. La Salle, IL: Open Court.
Popper, Karl (1980) “Letter to the Editor”, New Scientist 87.
Rudolph, John L. (2005) “Epistemology for the Masses: The Origins of ‘the Scientific Method' in American Schools”, History of Education Quarterly 45: 341-376.
Ruse, Michael (1988) “Karl Popper's Philosophy of Biology”, in Michael Ruse (ed.) But Is It Science? The Philosophical Question in the Creation/Evolution Controversy, pp. 156-176. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.
Ruse, Michael (1988) “Prologue: A Philosopher's Day in Court”, in Michael Ruse (ed.) But Is It Science? The Philosophical Question in the Creation/Evolution Controversy. Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.
Ruse, Michael (2001) Can a Darwinian Be a Christian?: The Relationship between Science and Religion. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Skoog, Gerald (1979) “The Topic of Evolution in Secondary School Biology Textbooks, 1900-1977”, Science Education 63: 621-640.
Stafford, Tim (1997, 8 Dec.) “The Making of a Revolution”, Christianity Today.
The World's Most Famous Court Trial: Tennessee Evolution Case (1978) Dayton, TN: Rhea County Historical Society.
Thurs, Daniel Patrick (2007) Science Talk: Changing Notions of Science in American Culture. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Thurs, Daniel Patrick (2011) “Scientific Methods”, in Harrison, P., Numbers, R. L. and Shank, M. H. (eds) Wrestling with Nature: From Omens to Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Thurs, Daniel Patrick and Numbers, Ronald L. (2011), “Science, Pseudo-science, and Science Falsely So-called”, in Harrison, P., Numbers, R. L. and Shank, M. H. (eds) Wrestling with Nature: From Omens to Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Vries, Paul de (1986) “Naturalism in the Natural Sciences”, Christian Scholar's Review 15: 388-396.
Wrigley, Michael (1989) “The Origins of Wittgenstein's Verificationism”, Synthese 78: 265-290.
Загрузки
Опубликован
Выпуск
Раздел
Как цитировать
Коды статьи
- EDN VMNDTL
- Тип статьи (РИНЦ) Научная статья (Научная статья)
