A. Science and the Gospel
("Mormonism")
Because this list is getting to be a bit long, I've decided to add an index, as I have in some of the other sections. You can either link to the item’s description (click on the “Ref.”), sorted by reference number, or go directly to the article by clicking on the arrow to the right of the Title.
INDEX AND QUICK-LINKS
|
Ref. |
Title: LDS Links (A.1) |
|
Ref. |
Title: Non-LDS Links (A.2) |
|
|
"Eppur si riconciliano" What is the Difference Between Science and Religion? |
|
Galileo on Literalist Biblicism |
|
||
|
Henry Eyring: The Age of the Earth |
|
How Evolution Became a Religion [an alternative view] |
|
||
|
Henry Eyring: Science Enhances Religion |
|
Intelligent Design: a Report from |
|
||
|
Henry Eyring: Science and Religion |
|
Stephen Jay Gould on the Pseudo-Science of "Creationism": "Genesis vs. Geology" (Atlantic Monthly, 09/1982) |
|
||
|
David O. McKay on Evolution as God's Method of Creation |
|
"Creationism" A Fundamentalist Protestant
Doctrine not Worthy of Consideration by LDS Schools: Wall Street Journal
online: "Houses of worship," |
|
||
|
John A. Widtsoe on the Literal Nature of Noah's Flood |
|
Review of The Blind Watchmaker (Richard Dawkins) |
|
||
|
Henry Eyring on the Origin of Man |
|
Review of Kenneth Miller's Finding |
|
||
|
Encyclopedia of Mormonism: Science and Religion |
|
The Intelligent Design Movement |
|
||
|
Did Ezra Taft Benson Moderate His Views? |
|
Review of Wrinkles in Time (George Smoot) |
|
||
|
Bertrand F. Harrison on the Origin of Species |
|
Review of Chaos -- the Making of a New Science (James Gleick) |
|
||
|
Reconciling Science and Religion (an open letter to college students from Elder Stephen L. Richards, 1933) |
|
Review of The Ends of Our Exploring: Ethical and Scientific Journals to Remote Places (Hooley McLaughlin) |
pending |
||
|
Elder Talmage's Defence of Science in General and Evolution in Particular |
|
Stephen Wolfram's A New Kind of Science |
|
||
|
The Fossil Record: Question in The Ensign, Answered by Dr. Morris S. Peterson, Prof. of Geology, BYU (1987) |
|
Arguments Against Consilience |
|
||
|
Mormonism as a Friendly Environment for Science (David H. Bailey, Dialogue (1986)) |
|
Review of When Science Meets Religion: Enemies Strangers or Partners? (Ian Barbour) |
|
||
|
|
|
Intelligent Design site -- one of the better ones (http://www.origins.org/) A.2.15.1
William Lane Craig, “The Existence of God and the Beginning of the
Universe.” A.2.15.2 Walter L. Bradley: "The Designed 'Just So' Universe" |
|
||
|
An Email Exchange on Science and Religion (between a concerned mother and myself -- 2000) |
|
Review of Rocks of Ages by Stephen Jay Gould |
|
||
|
Dr. Michael Whiting: BYU Evolution Curriculum |
|
Primer on Mathematical Philosophy: “The Three Crises in Mathematics: Logicism, Intuitionism, and Formalism” |
|
||
|
How the |
|
Indigenous
People’s Council on Biocolonialism: “Genetic "Markers"- Not a
Valid Test of Native Identity |
|
||
|
Encyclopedia of Mormonism: Evolution |
|
Terry Gray’s review of
“ |
|
||
|
David O. McKay's Comment About Evolution |
|
“Can a Christian Be an Evolutionst”
a Lunch-time talk by Terry Gray. |
|
||
|
Selected LDS Quotes on Evolution |
|
15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense; July 2002; by John Rennie; Opponents of evolution want to make a place for creationism by tearing down real science, but their arguments don't hold up |
|
||
|
Brigham Young: Education in Religion and Science |
|
15 Answers to John Rennie and Scientific American’s nonsense. A counter-charge by a creationist organization |
|
||
|
Review of Heaven and Earth: Reconciling Scientific Thought with LDS Theology |
|
“By the Numbers: Down with Evolution!”; Scientific
American, March 2002; by Rodger Doyle; Creationists are changing state
educational standards. Ammunition to use to educate school board and other
officials on what science teaches. |
|
||
|
What about Man: His Origin and Destiny and Similar Writings by Some of the Brethren? |
pending |
Evolution and the Origins of Disease; Scientific American, November 1998; by Nesse,
Williams. Those who oppose evolution often say it has not predicted anything.
But the physical modelling ability of evolution by natural selection are beginning to have results which even the lay person
can readily understand and appreciate: namely in the area of medicine. |
|
||
|
Link to Zoology 475 (Evolution) at |
|
C.S. Lewis on Creation and Evolution: the Acworth Letters, 1944-1960. |
|
||
|
Link to Eyring-L's FAQ on Science and the Gospel |
|
Review of How the Mind Works (Steven Pinker) |
|
||
|
Link to Mel Tungate's Website (section science and the Gospel) |
|
“The Last Americans: Environmental collapse and the end of civilization,” by Jared Diamond |
|
||
|
BYU Zoology 338 (Duane Jefferey) |
|
“The Man Who Knew Too Much: Stephen Jay Gould’s opus posthumous,” reviewed by David Quammen |
|
||
|
Who Cares Most About Science? You Might Be Surprised |
|
Are we still evolving? An interesting yet short answer by
a biology instructor in |
|
||
|
Elder Russell M. Nelson on the Purpose of Creation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Mormonism and the New Creationism" (David H.
Bailey, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Science and Non-Science, an excellent examination of science and religion on the Why Prophets? site, by Chris Tolworthy et. al. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeff Lindsay’s page on “DNA and the ‘Lamanites’” |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Link to Mel Tungate’s Website (section on DNA and “Lamanites” – the best overall collection of material on the “Tom Murphy affair” |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Link to discussion on evolution on |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Link to Brant Gardner’s article on “DNA and the ‘Lamanites’” |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marion G. Romney on evolution |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Luke’s page of quotations on evolution …and birth control |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interview: Dialogue and
Duane Jeffery |
|
|
|
|
A.1 Specifically LDS Links
A.1.1 "EPPUR
SI RICONCILIANO" (WITH APOLOGIES TO GALILEO): WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN SCIENCE AND RELIGION?
A personal essay on my own approach
to how science and religion are properly reconciled without damage to either
"magisterium"
A.1.2 HENRY
EYRING: THE AGE OF THE EARTH
A.1.3 HENRY
EYRING: SCIENCE ENHANCES RELIGION
A.1.4 HENRY
EYRING: SCIENCE AND RELIGION
A.1.6
JOHN A. WIDTSOE ON THE LITERAL NATURE OF NOAH'S FLOOD
A.1.7
HENRY EYRING ON THE ORIGIN OF MAN
A.1.8
ENCYCLOPEDIA OF MORMONISM: SCIENCE AND RELIGION
A.1.9
DID EZRA TAFT BENSON MODERATE HIS VIEWS?
A.1.10
BERTRAND F. HARRISON ON THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES
A.1.10.2 There Are Many Different Environments
A.1.10.3 A Giant Genealogical Pedigree Chart
A.1.10.4 Progression of Species
A.1.10.5 Plants and Animals Defined
A.1.10.6 Cell Structures Are Similar
A.1.10.7 The Mechanism of Inheritance
A.1.10.8 Nothing Proven Conclusively
A.1.11
RECONCILING RELIGION AND SCIENCE (an open letter to college students from Elder
Stephen L. Richards, 1933)
A.1.12
ELDER TALMAGE'S DEFENCE OF SCIENCE IN GENERAL AND EVOLUTION IN PARTICULAR
A.1.12.1 The Earth Older Than Man
A.1.12.2 Life and Death Before Man's Advent
A.1.12.3 From the Simple to the Complex
A.1.12.4 Adam a Historic Personage
A.1.12.5 Primary and Secondary Causes
A.1.12.9 Man's Place in Nature
A.1.12.12 Nobility of Adam's Race
A.1.12.13 The Ante-Mortal State
A.1.12.14 A Power Above Nature
A.1.12.15 Evolution, True and False
A.1.12.16 In the Lineage of Deity
A.1.12.17 Man's Relative Littleness
A.1.13. THE FOSSIL RECORD: Question in The Ensign Answered by Dr. Morris S. Peterson, Prof. of Geology, BYU (1987)
A.1.14 MORMONISM AS A FRIENDLY ENVIRONMENT FOR SCIENCE (David H. Bailey, Dialogue (1986)
A.1.14.1 The Theory of Relativity
A.1.14.4 Geology and Paleontology
A.1.14.5 Evolution and Molecular Biology
A.1.14.6 The Panspermia Theory
A.1.14.8 Historical LDS Approaches to Science and Region
A.1.14.9 A Scientific Approach to LDS Theology
A.1.14.11 The Eternal Nature of God and Man
A.1.14.12 Determinism Versus Free Will
A.1.16 AN EMAIL EXCHANGE ON SCIENCE AND RELIGION (between a concerned mother and myself -- 2000)
A.1.17 DR. MICHAEL WHITING: BYU EVOLUTION CURRICULUM
A.1.17.2 Michael Whiting To Marc Schindler 06/03/00 0827 MST 74
A.1.18 HOW THE TEMPLE PRESENTS CREATION [A PERSONAL EXPERIENCE]
A.1.19 ENCYCLOPEDIA OF MORMONISM: EVOLUTION
A.1.20 DAVID O. MCKAY S COMMENT ABOUT EVOLUTION
A.1.21 SELECTED LDS QUOTES ON EVOLUTION
A.1.21.1 Section 1: Official documents from the BYU
packet
A.1.21.2 Section 2: Documents outside the official
BYU packet
A.1.21.2.1 Improvement Era:
“Priesthood Quorum’s Table”, Joseph F. Smith (1910)
A.1.21.2.2
Juvenile Instructor: “Philosophy
and the Church Schools” (Joseph F. Smith, 1911)
A.1.21.2.3
Letter: Man: His Origin and Destiny
(David O. McKay, 1957)
A.1.21.2.5 Letter: Evolution (Secretary to David O.
McKay, 1959)
A.1.21.2.6
Ensign: “The Blessings and
Responsibilities of Womanhood” (Spencer W. Kimball, 1976)
A.1.21.2.7
Ensign: Evolution – Excerpts from
two talks (Ezra Taft Benson, 1975; 1987)
A.1.22 BRIGHAM YOUNG: EDUCATION IN RELIGION AND SCIENCE
A.1.23 REVIEW: OF HEAVEN AND EARTH: RECONCILING SCIENTIFIC THOUGHT WITH LDS THEOLOGY (various contributors; just released from Deseret Books)
A.1.23.3.1 Science as a Way to God”: 85-87
A.1.23.3.1.1 Belief as understanding
A.1.23.3.1.2
The
all-encompassing nature of truth
A.1.23.3.1.3
Spiritual gifts; “knowing beyond a shadow
of a doubt
A.1.23.3.2 Oh Say, What Is Truth?:
96-98
A.1.23.3.2.1
Professional versus lay concerns about palaeontology, geology, etc.
A.1.23.3.2.2
Can religion inform science? Two ways
of looking at the same data
A.1.23.3.2.3
Truth: two meanings
A.1.23.3.3 Atoms, Stars, and Us”: 108-111
A.1.23.3.3.1 Is it fair to
expect church line leaders to be experts in secular disciplines?
A.1.23.3.3.2
Do we sometimes use science as a
stick to beat each other over the head with?
A.1.23.3.3.3
The
ambiguity of science versus the certainty of religion
A.1.23.3.3.4
The real
“consilience”, or approach of science and religion together
A.1.23.3.4 Truth, the Sum of Existence”: 156-161
A.1.23.3.4.1 Is it fair to
expect church line leaders to be experts in secular disciplines?
A.1.23.3.4.2
God sets the laws; scientists study
them (science didn’t create physical law)
A.1.23.3.4.3 Necessary differences between religion and science
A.1.23.3.4.4
Necessary differences: Creation as an
example
A.1.23.3.4.5 Necessary differences: Nonoverlapping data
A.1.23.3.4.6
Areas of near-overlap: the Anthropic
Principle
A.1.23.3.4.7
the Anthropic Principle:
“Participatory Universe” variant
A.1.24. WHAT ABOUT MAN: HIS ORIGIN AND DESTINY AND SIMILAR WRITINGS BY SOME OF THE BRETHREN? [pending]
A.1.25 LINK TO ZOOLOGY 475 (EVOLUTION) AT BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY
A.1.26
LINK TO EYRING-L'S FAQ ON SCIENCE AND THE GOSPEL.
Eyring-L is a public Internet discussion forum
for those interested in the topic of science and the Gospel. a FAQ is a "Frequently Asked Questions" list,
usually compiled for newcomers to the list so they don't feel unprepared if
they want to participate on the list.
A.1.27 LINK TO MEL TUNGATE'S WEBSITE:
An excellent source of information on
science-Gospel related issues (specifically evolution)
A.1.28 SCIENCE AND EVOLUTION: FROM BYU’S BIOETHICS CLASS (ZOOLOGY 338)
A.1.29 WHO CARES MOST ABOUT
SCIENCE? YOU MIGHT BE SURPRISED.
Statistics on the
number of scientists from
A.1.30 ELDER RUSSELL M. NELSON ON THE PURPOSE
OF CREATION.
Science studies how things are done, but stays away from
questions of teleological (purpose-oriented questions such as
"why"). Elder Nelson of the First Quorum of the Twelve, a medical
doctor by profession, talks about the purpose of creation, while pointing out
that we don't yet know all the details about how creation was
accomplished. An excellent example of what Stephen Jay Gould (anticipated by
the Church's own First Presidency statement in 1931) called
"non-overlapping magisteria" (NOMA), the concept that science
and religion approach topics from different directions. Hence the apparent
difficulty in reconciliation has little to do with the answers each produces,
but rather the questions each "magisterium"
asks. From April 2000 General Conference
A.1.31 "MORMONISM
AND THE NEW CREATIONISM" (David H. Bailey, 04/07/01)
This is a link to another of David
Bailey's great papers on Science and Mormonism; this one examines the LDS
response to Intelligent Design, a new form of creationism (although its
proponents would hotly deny that characterization). In an earlier form of this
paper, Dr. Bailey had an abstract, which I reproduce here, with permission:
The "scientific
creationism" movement has become quite popular in recent years,
particularly among evangelical and conservative Protestants. recently a new band of creationists has arisen, employing
sophisticated arguments for an "Intelligent Designer" as the author
of creation. Among other activities, creationists have pressed public school
systems to de-emphasize evolution and to permit equal time for "creation
science." In light of these developments, some Latter-day Saints wonder if
they should align themselves with this movement. This paper argues that (1)
creationism is thinly disguised evangelical Biblical literalism; (2) the
"new" creationism is just the old creationism in "designer
clothes;" (3) the new creationism is, if anything, even less qualified as
a scientific theory than the old; and (4) either form of creationism contrasts
sharply with fundamental LDS beliefs, which teach of harmony between science
and religion, and which describe a God that works within, rather than beyond
the realm of natural law. Consequently, Latter-day Saints are advised to be
highly skeptical of creationist claims, and to
resist the efforts of creationists to impose their sectarian beliefs in public
schools.
Note: this version is a draft; it has
just been published in Dialogue: a
Journal of Mormon Thought, 35/4 Winter 2002:
39-59. Some changes may have occurred.
A.1.32 "SCIENCE
AND NON-SCIENCE" (Chris Tolworthy, David
Wills & Joseph McElprang)
"Many people do not believe in
God. When you ask them why, you find that the kind of God they imagine is
nothing like the true God. It is the same with evolution. Many people do
not believe in evolution. Many others do believe in it. But the real question
is, what do we mean by evolution? It seems to me that
all the problems associated with evolution arise because we do are all talking
about different things."
A.1.33 JEFF LINDSAY’S PAGE ON “DNA AND THE
‘LAMANITES’”.
I have a separate link in Section C (Apologetics) to Jeff
Lindsay’s general apologetics site, but given the current interest in the
topic, here’s a direct link to his excellent survey of the science behind
the issue, as opposed to some of the overheated things one is hearing from
those with an anti-Mormon agenda.
A.1.34 MEL
TUNGATE’S PAGE ON “DNA AND THE LAMANITES”.
Jeff Lindsay’s page is an apologetics page (but none the worse for
that); Mel’s is a comprehensive coverage of the issue, both pro and con.
A.1.35 MERIDIAN’S
DISCUSSION PAGES
on evolution.
on separating the questions of
evolution (a scientific question) from our descent from Adam (a religious question).
From an address given in General Conference.
A.1.37 BRANT
GARDNER: “TEMPEST IN A TEAPOT: DNA STUDIES AND THE BOOK OF MORMON”
an excellent and very fair-minded article from the January 2003
issue of the FAIR Journal.
A.1.38 SEAN LUKE’S PAGE OF LDS QUOTES ON
EVOLUTION
Graduate student and research assistant at the Dept. of Computer
Science, late of the
A.1.39 DIALOGUE INTERVIEW WITH DUANE
JEFFERY: “THOUGHTS ON MORMONISM, EVOLUTION AND BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY
Duane Jeffery is the doyen of the biologists at BYU and is generally
credited for having turned the biology program from a shambles into one of the
best-respected in the region – in fact, the evolution program has been
judged to be one of the best undergraduate programs in evolution in the entire
A.2 Non-LDS (but in my
opinion very useful) Links
A.2.1
GALILEO ON LITERALIST BIBLICISM
A.2.2
HOW EVOLUTION BECAME A RELIGION [AN ALTERNATIVE VIEW]
A.2.3
INTELLIGENT DESIGN: A REPORT FROM OHIO
A.2.4
STEPHEN JAY GOULD ON THE PSEUDO-SCIENCE OF “CREATIONISM”:
“GENESIS VS. GEOLOGY” (ATLANTIC MONTHLY, 09/1982)
A.2.5
CREATIONISM” A FUNDAMENTALIST PROTESTANT DOCTRINE NOT WORTHY OF
CONSIDERATION BY LDS SCHOOLS: WALL STREET JOURNAL ONLINE: “HOUSES OF WORSHIP”, 24/05/02
A.2.6
REVIEW OF THE BLIND WATCHMAKER (RICHARD DAWKINS)
A.2.6.1
Part I: Introduction / Philosophical Background
A.2.7
REVIEW OF KENNETH MILLER’S FINDING DARWIN’S GOD
A.2.8
THE INTELLIGENT DESIGN MOVEMENT
A.2.8.3 Dembski’s Recommended
Bibliography
A.2.8.4 My notes on ID as poor science
and poor LDS theology
A.2.8.4.1 The
difference between science and religion
A.2.8.4.2 Why do I
feel ID is bad science?
A.2.8.4.3 Why do I feel ID is bad religion?
A.2.9
REVIEW OF WRINKLES IN
TIME (GEORGE SMOOT)
A.2.10
REVIEW OF CHAOS -- THE
MAKING OF A NEW SCIENCE (JAMES GLEICK)
A.2.11 REVIEW OF THE ENDS OF OUR EXPLORING: ETHICAL AND SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS TO REMOTE PLACES (HOOLEY McLAUGHLIN) [pending]
A.2.12. STEPHEN
WOLFRAM'S A NEW KIND OF SCIENCE.
Either the greatest thing since sliced bread, or a
crank's lifework.
The jury's still out, but Wolfram's new book on cellular automata is one of the
most talked-about books in the science world these days. This link is to W.
Edwin Clark's page which is a page of links to reviews of A New Kind of
Science and discussion about it (and even satirical reviews).
A.2.13. ARGUMENTS AGAINST CONSILIENCE.
The atheist E. O. Wilson has argued in his well-known book, Consilience
(New York, Alfred A. Knopf: 1998), that all things biological are reducible to
physical phenomena. That would include free will and the human mind, a concept
that would be hard to swallow by theists. Kenneth Miller, in Searching for
Darwin's God, turned
A.2.14 REVIEW
OF WHEN SCIENCE MEETS RELIGION: ENEMIES, STRANGERS OR PARTNERS? (IAN BARBOUR)
Ian Barbour, who received the 1999 Templeton Prize* has written a number
of books about that grey area where the two "magisteria" of
science and religion approach each other, to the point, possibly, of touching.
This is his easiest, although not the earliest. It's the one I'd recommend to a
beginner, since it merely catalogues all the different positions on the
interaction between religion and science. He has organized the book very
logically, in degrees of conflict vs. consilience and shows how they apply to
various scientific topics. *The Templeton Prize, a cool million bucks, is
given each year by the Templeton Foundation, which is funded by Sir John
Templeton, a USAmerican who moved to Bermuda so (presumably among other
reasons) he could accept a British peerage: he's now Sir John Templeton. At any
rate, a personal interest of his is science and religion, and his foundation
funds research into this area. Barbour is an emeritus professor of physics and
a believer, but he doesn't show any personal cards in this book -- just maps
the landscape so that people can follow other books of his (about which more
later, when I've finished reading them and reviewing them here!) Oh, for more
on the Templeton Foundation, see http://www.templeton.org/ (if you
go to http://www.templeton.com/ you'll reach the site of the
Templeton Franklin mutual fund company -- the company which helped Templeton
make his millions. I include the link for the sake of context, not as a
commercial recommendation. This is a man who really is into his hobby!)
A.2.14.1 Back
cover blurb, author info
A.2.14.3
Excerpt (from chapter 5)
A.2.15 A SERIES OF LINKS TO AN INTERESTING ECUMENICAL SITE which means it has science/religion
links from people of all religions, but what they have in common is that they
are believers and, unless otherwise noted, believe science and religion can be
reconciled. The bad news, from my point of view, is that they use Intelligent
Design, and variants thereof to reconcile it, which is not, in my opinion, the
way to go. However, the information is so interesting that I had to include it,
even if I disagree with their conclusions. Here are two of what I think are the
best
I've included links to this, and the
following articles because I think they're particularly informative articles.
Because I don't accept ID, I find flaws in the arguments, but as arguments go,
these ones aren't bad, and my purpose here isn't just to "evangelize"
but to try to inform, as well, which includes "the other side" from
time to time.
A.2.15.2 Walter L.
Bradley: "The Designed 'Just So' Universe"
-- ID on the cosmological scale is
known as the Strong Anthropic Principle, or SAP. In my own personal view,
Bradley still does not answer the fundamental question of how one recognizes
design. He says because designed products can be described mathematically, and
since the universe has certain properties without which we would not exist
(hence the SAP), and that can be described mathematically, that this
constitutes evidence of design. I disagree: I can describe a completely random
process mathematically (namely, the constant 'pi'. It's not a bad attempt,
though, and if you learn towards the Intelligent Design theory, this isn't bad.
No cigar, but close. Why the problem with
recognizing design going the SAP route? Because it's a circular argument --
yes, the universe exists only because of some remarkable coincidences. And
we're here to observe those coincidences. All that proves is that if those
coincidences weren't here, neither would we be,
which gains us nothing in terms of understanding.
A.2.16 REVIEW OF ROCKS OF AGES (STEPHEN JAY
GOULD)
This is one of Gould’s most accessible books to the layperson and
is, in effect, his “Declaration of NOMA, or division of scientific and
religion “magisteria” by dint of the questions they ask. Highly recommended.
A.2.16.1.1 Personal Review of the Book
A.2.16.1.2 Is There an LDS Counterpart to NOMA?
A.2.16.1.2.1 Encyclopedia of
Mormonism on “Evolution”
A.2.16.1.2.2 Marion G. Romney on
“Evolution”
A.2.16.2.1 From the book intro
A.2.16.2.2 Obituary (The [UK] Guardian, 22/05/02) Short Version
A.2.16.2.3 Obituary (The [UK] Guardian, 22/05/02) Long Version
A.2.16.4.5 Some examples
of NOMA: Galileo as mythological hero
A.2.16.4.6 Some examples
of NOMA: Newton as mythological hero
A.2.16.4.7 Why the conflict in the first place? An
overview of the history
A.2.16.4.8 Some examples
of NOMA: William Jennings Bryant as mythological hero
A.2.17 A PRIMER IN
MATHEMATICAL PHILOSOPHY: “THE THREE CRISES IN MATHEMATICS: LOGICISM, INTUITIONISM,
AND FORMALISM
Not all my science interests have to
do with the overlap of science and religion, although this topic comes closer
to that than one might think from the title, since, for instance,
trinitarianism is a doctrine that would be impossible without the underlying
philosophy upon which Logicism is formed (broadly known as Platonism). This is
a superb, even if a bit dated, summary of philosophy for mathematicians who, as
the author points out, basically threw in the towel with respect to studying
philosophy when Kurt Gödel published his famous Incompleteness Theorems in
1931. This is an excerpt from Douglas M. Campbell, John C. Higgins, eds.
Mathematics: People, Problems, Results, vol. 2 (Belmont CA: Wadsworth, 1984):
183-193.
A.2.18 INDIGENOUS
PEOPLE’S COUNCIL ON BIOCOLONIALISM: “Genetic "Markers"-
Not a Valid Test of Native Identity
Across the country, there is
currently a lot of interest in the prospects of using genetics to determine
whether somebody is really Native American. This interest has arisen in many
contexts‚from determining whether ancient remains are Native American for
purposes of repatriation to groups of people who are seeking recognition as an
Indian tribe by the
A.2.19 TERRY
GRAY’S REVIEW OF DARWIN ON TRIAL BY PHILLIP E. JOHNSON
Terry Gray
is a chemist who used to teach at
A.2.20 CAN
A CHRISTIAN BE AN EVOLUTIONIST? A CALVIN COLLEGE NOON-TIME LECTURE BY TERRY M. GRAY (20/03/1995)
This is a seminal presentation given
by Terry M. Gray, mentioned in A.2.19.
A.2.21 15
ANSWERS TO CREATIONIST NONSENSE
From an article in Scientific
American, July 2002; by John Rennie; Opponents of
evolution want to make a place for creationism by tearing down real science,
but their arguments don't hold up
A.2.22 15 ANSWERS TO JOHN RENNIE AND SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN’S
NONSENSE
A counter-charge to Scientific American’s piece, by a
creationist organization. Written by
Bert Thompson, Ph.D. (Microbiology), Executive Director, Apologetics Press; and
Brad Harrub, Ph.D. (neurobiology and anatomy),
Director of Scientific Information, Apologetics Press. Dr. Thompson is a
former professor at the
A.2.23 DOWN
WITH EVOLUTION! Creationists are changing state educational standards
From Scientific American: Since 1920 creationists have been successful
in persuading legislatures in five Southern states to pass laws favourable to
their views, but the courts consistently struck them down, saying that they
violated the establishment clause of the Constitution. In the 1990s
creationists began focusing instead on changing state educational standards.
The most famous attempt to do so in recent years--the decision of the Kansas
Board of Education to eliminate evolution from the state's science
standards--was not a success: the decision was reversed in 2001 when
antievolution board members were defeated for re-election.
A.2.24 EVOLUTION
AND THE ORIGINS OF DISEASE: practical demonstrations of evolution showing up in
medicine
Evolution and the Origins of Disease;
Scientific American, November 1998;
by Nesse, Williams. Those who oppose evolution often say
it has not predicted anything. But the physical modelling ability of evolution
by natural selection are beginning to have results
which even the lay person can readily understand and appreciate: namely in the
area of medicine.
A.2.25 C.S. LEWIS AND THE ACWORTH LETTERS.
By Gary G. Berngren
(Department of History,
A.2.26 REVIEW
OF HOW THE MIND WORKS (STEVEN PINKER)
Fascinating book written clearly,
wittingly and with great insight. Pinker knows when to stop, when to label fact as fact and
speculation as speculation. I’d call him a new Isaac Asimov
except that Pinker writes at a far deeper level, yet just as clearly as Asimov. He clearly brings a wide range of intellectual and
living experience to bear on a profound topic.
A.2.26.5.1 From the dust jacket
A.2.26.5.2 A current
quote of note
A.2.26.6.1 Preface [“Two Notes of
Humility”]
A.2.26.6.3 How we handle symmetry (also from
chapter 4)
A.2.26.6.4 How we handle taxonomy (from chapter 5,
“Good Ideas”)
A.2.26.6.5 How we handle mathematics (from chapter
5, “Good Ideas”)
A.2.26.6.6 What is
“genius” (from chapter 5, “Good Ideas”)
A.2.26.6.7 How we learn
“disgust” (from chapter 6, “Hotheads”)
A.2.26.6.8 How we learn fear (from chapter 6,
“Hotheads”)
A.2.26.6.9 Happiness (from chapter 6,
“Hotheads”)
A.2.26.6.10 How we learn trust (from chapter 6,
“Hotheads”)
A.2.26.6.11 Grief (from chapter 6,
“Hotheads”)
A.2.26.6.12 Spouses, kith and kin (from chapter 7,
“Family Values”)
A.2.26.6.13 Parents and children (from chapter 7,
“Family Values”)
A.2.26.6.14 Men and women (from chapter 7,
“Family Values”)
A.2.26.6.15 Sexual partners (from chapter 7,
“Family Values”)
A.2.26.6.16 Failure of feminism (from chapter 7,
“Family Values”)
A.2.26.6.17 An example of modern male rivalry (from
chapter 7, “Family Values”)
A.2.26.6.18 The fine arts
(from chapter 7, “Family Values”)
A.2.26.6.19 The soul (from
chapter 8, “The Meaning of Life”)
A.2.27 “THE
LAST AMERICANS: ENVIRONMENTAL COLLAPSE AND THE END OF CIVILIZATION” (JARED DIAMOND)
Harper’s Magazine, June 2003. The
main theme of this article is that past examples – in this case the Maya –
show us that it is in the nature of civilizations to rise and fall, with the
difference between the Maya and us/United States (he rather provincially uses
the two interchangeably, as when he refers to “we” having lost the
Grand Banks fishery [it’s true the Grand Banks fishery is in serious
trouble, but it doesn’t belong to the US; he might be thinking of the
Georges Bank fishery instead. Also, while I’m on this tangent, he
ironically points to the Alaska salmon fishery as an example of a well-run
fishery, ignoring the fact that Alaska has done so by blatantly breaking the
Pacific Salmon Treaty, pushing its problems onto the backs of Washington,
Oregon and British Columbia salmon fishers].
But what I found interesting was how the rise and fall of the Mayan
civilization itself echoes a theme in both the Old Testament and the Book of Mormon, that of cyclical rises and falls. When you look at
the demographics of this, it makes you wonder how anyone can do DNA studies
comparing ancient and modern populations, given that this period
“squeezing” of the gene pool works to limit its diversity, and in
the process very probably wiping out any traces of some ancestral strains.
A.2.28 “THE
MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH: STEPHEN JAY GOULD’S OPUS POSTHUMOUS” (DAVID
QUAMMEN)
Harper’s
Magazine, June 2003. This is one of the best reviews I’ve found on
Stephen Jay Gould’s huge (1400 pp long) book on evolution, and the last
book he wrote before his untimely death. Gould’s book is The Structure of
Evolutionary Theory and came out by Harvard University Press in 2002. The
review itself is also long and deals with more than just the book, but also
some of the issues which Gould raises in his book.
Short and interesting answer by Paul Tenser, a biology
instructor in