Creation, Evolution, and the Boundaries of Science: The Debate in the United States

Authors

  • Ronald L. Numbers Университет Висконсина-Мэдисона , University of Wisconsin-Madison Автор
  • Edward J. Larson Университет Пеппердин , Pepperdine University Автор

Keywords:

science, religion, demarcation, Scopes trial, William Jennings Bryan, evolution, First Amendment to U.S. Constitution, Epperson trial, young-Earth creationism, McLean v. Arkansas, Michael Ruse, Edwards v. Aguillard, Karl Popper, intelligent design, Tammy Kitzmiller, et al. v. Dover Area School District

Abstract

This article draws on the debates over evolution in the United States to explore efforts to define and defend the boundaries of science. When the first organized opposition to evolution appeared in the early 1920s, antievolutionists insisted that evolution should not be taught because its speculative nature placed it outside the boundaries of science. By the last quarter of the century, however, they had largely abandoned that position infavor of arguing that creationism and intelligent design should themselves be regarded as science. This dramatic shift reflected a major reinterpretation of the U.S. Constitution, especially the First Amendment, which states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”. Until after World War II the U.S. Supreme Court limited the application of this provision to the federal government. That practice began to change in the late 1940s, when the Court began applying First Amendment restrictions against the establishment of religion to the individual states and public school districts by way of the 14th Amendment; by the early 1960s it was asserting a goal of “neutrality” with regard to religion in public education. Because teaching “bad science” does not violate the Constitution, opponents of creationism have embraced the tactic of demonstrating that creation-science and Intelligent Design are essentially religious doctrines - and thus that teaching them in public schools is unconstitutional.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

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.

Downloads

Published

2015-07-15

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Numbers R.L., Larson E.J. Creation, Evolution, and the Boundaries of Science: The Debate in the United States // State, Religion and Church. 2015. Vol. 33, no. 4. P. 55–83.

Коды статьи

  • EDN VMNDTL
  • Тип статьи (РИНЦ) Научная статья (Научная статья)