2/01/2003 05:08:00 PM | Timothy Microevolution I do not understand this whole uproar over creationists not being able to understand anti-biotic resistant strains of pathogens (or have I got the issue wrong?). My understanding is that creationists may be willing to grant the fact of micro-evolution, that is mutation of a species. What they do not grant is macro-evolution, of mutation from one species to another (saying for example, how can a complex thing like a mammal's eye develop by random mutation when each of its parts would have no function-- and hence no reason to survive.) I can understand why you might deny someone who a recommendation who is going to work on a biology Ph.D. But does this matter to all kinds of doctors? (I don't know.. I suppose doctors research too) And no, Brad, I don't think the Pope is really 'hedging' about evolution when he talks about souls: Prof. Dini denied recommendations to students who believed in evolution's physical reality; you can do that without being concerned what they think of a soul. It is the method that is important, not the subject matter. Brad's argument about non-Platonists and non-Marxists being able to study Greek philosophy and Marx is stupid. Of course you can. Dini's claim is that if you believe in creationism, you do not understand the scientific method. That's contestable, but plausible. Finally, I don't know about doctors, but scientists are under no obligation not to use their credentials to write books promoting creationism. Because it is so intimately involved in science, I can see the argument that their view of science will be warped. To pretend that they can act 'as if' they believe in evolution is sort of silly... maybe if they are performing heart surgery, sure... but then the argument becomes whether in this instance it was right for the prof. to deny a recommendation, not whether if it would always be wrong. And I understand the creationists in part because the scientists old claim was that you had to accept the tenets of the priesthood to become a member. But I tell you, if a professor tells me he or she doesn't want to write me a letter of recommendation, I'm not going to ask. I don't see why the professor just does not note on the letter of recommendation that the person is a creationist, and the employers. etc. can make their own judgments. I suspect he means he will not be able to write a good recommendation, so he won't write one at all, which I'm sure many of us have wished professors have been bold enough to tell us. perma link |
| 0 comments
0 Comments: |
Dartmouth The Free Press Alums for Social Change The Green Magazine The Dartmouth Dartmouth Observer Dartmouth Review Dartlog Inner Office The Little Green Blog Welton Chang's Blog Vox in Sox MN Publius (Matthew Martin) Netblitz Dartmouth Official News Other Blogs Ampersand Atrios Arts & Letters Altercation Body and Soul Blog For America Brad DeLong Brad Plumer CalPundit Campus Nonsense Clarksphere Crooked Timber Cursor Daily Kos Dean Nation Dan Drezner The Front Line Instapundit Interesting Times Is That Legal? Talking Points Memo Lady-Likely Lawrence Lessig Lean Left Left2Right Legal Theory Matthew Yglesias Ms. Musings MWO Nathan Newman New Republic's &c. Not Geniuses Ornicus Oxblog Pandagon Political State Report Political Theory Daily Review Queer Day Roger Ailes SCOTUS blog Talk Left TAPPED Tacitus This Modern World Tough Democrat Untelevised Volokh Conspiracy Washington Note X. & Overboard Magazines, Newspapers and Journals Boston Globe Ideas Boston Review Chronicle of Higher Education Common Dreams Dissent In These Times Mother Jones New York Review of Books New York Times Salon Slate The American Prospect The Nation The New Republic The Progressive Tikkun Tom Paine Village Voice Washington Monthly Capitol Hill Media ABC's The Note American Journalism Review Columbia Journalism Review CQ Daily Howler Donkey Rising The Hill Medianews National Journal NJ Hotline NJ Wake-up call NJ Early Bird NJ Weekly Political Wire Roll Call Spinsanity Search Search the DFP |