When Good Secular Learning Turns Bad 07/06/2011
Secular learning is a blessing. Secular knowledge enlightens minds, enriches lives, and empowers people to accomplish great things. It should come as no surprise that the Lord has said “to be learned is good” (2 Nephi 9:29). At the same time, however, secular learning can be a curse. It can ensnare us by causing us to forget the Lord. This ensnaring potential explains why the Lord added caution to the previous statement. He said, “to be learned is good if one hearkens unto the counsels of God.” Faith can be weakened by secular learning. At greatest risk are those who study from mechanistic theory books in one hand while letting go of the iron rod with the other. They allow themselves to be carried away by the mist of secularism and eventually abdicate their childhood faith. They wander away from the teachings of the gospel because they do not hearken unto the counsels of God. Ezra Taft Benson acknowledged this problem when He said, “Students at universities are sometimes so filled with the doctrines of the world they begin to question the doctrines of the [Lord’s] gospel.” This is what happened to Charles Darwin. You see, Charles was a brilliant naturalist. He greatly advanced our understanding of evolutionary processes that create variety within species. But like so many others, the more he studied evolution, the more he loosened his grip on the iron rod of faith. The study of evolution was not to blame for his faltering faith. On the contrary, his study of evolution was a good thing. His faith faltered because he did not “hearken unto the counsels of God” while studying evolution. Remember: studying evolution = good; not hearkening unto the counsels of God while studying evolution = bad. Let’s take a closer look at his digression from believer into agnostic in his own words. The following are excerpts from the “Life and Letter of Charles Darwin”. 1. He was once a believer. During these three years (1836-1839) I was led to think much about religion. Whilst aboard the Beagle I was quite orthodox [in Christian belief] and remember being laughed at by several of the officers for quoting the Bible as an…authority on some point of morality. 2. He had a spiritual witness that God lives. [T]he most unusual argument for the existence of an intelligent God is drawn from the deep inward convictions and feelings which are experienced by most persons…. I was led by such feelings…to the firm conviction of the existence of God. 3. Atheistic influences in evolution worked on him gradually. But I had gradually come by this time to see that the Old Testament was no more to be trusted than sacred books of the Hindoos…. By further reflecting that the clearest evidence would be requisite to make any sane man believe in the miracles by which Christianity is supported, and that the more we know of the fixed laws of nature, the more incredible do miracles become…I gradually came to disbelieve in Christianity as a divine revelation. 4. His disbelief grew little by little. I was unwilling to give up my belief,…but I found it more and more difficult…to invent evidence that would suffice to convince me [to believe in God]. This disbelief crept over me at a very slow rate, but was at last complete. The rate was so slow that I felt no distress, and have never doubted for a single moment that my conclusion was correct. 5. Natural selection led him away from God. The old argument from design in nature…which formerly seemed so conclusive, fails now that the law of natural selection has been discovered. 6. He let go of the iron rod. [Once] I deserved to be called a theist,…[now] I must be content to remain an agnostic. This post is not a diatribe against science and evolution. Studying science and evolution is cool and highly recommended. The Lord wants us to study scientific theories (see, for example, D&C 88:78). What is neither cool nor recommended is allowing science to displace faith. Science usually displaces faith when the two disagree. So what should we do when science contradicts fundamental gospel principles? The answer is to recognize that scientific theories are constantly changing and being replaced by better theories; hence science is not perfect. A scientific principle that contradicts a fundamental gospel truth today may be replaced by a scientific principle that is consistent with the gospel tomorrow. It also helps to remember that our understanding of how the Lord created and governs the natural world is not perfect. The gospel is silent on most natural matters. However, when the Lord comes again He will reveal secrets regarding life, the earth, and the heavens, things currently not revealed in the gospel (D&C 101:32-34). We may be surprised to learn that some of these secrets are consistent with modern theories of science. (Note: mechanistic refers to scientific theories that explain natural phenomena solely by physical material and physical forces.) 4 Comments Well, I am trying to keep things merry for the Christmas season by avoiding hard hitting and controversial issues. It’s important to smile and be thankful during the holidays. In keeping with this sentiment, this brief blog is on a technological invention that provided a great boon to science - the printing press. Here are a few of huge benefits: 1. The printing press made it possible for people to catalogue and disseminate scientific information so that others did not have to rediscover what had already been learned. 2. People could read their own copies of the Bible and therefore come up with their own interpretation of scripture. This loosened the shackles that the Church had on the minds of people. With the printed word of God in their hands, people learned to think and discover truth for themselves. 3. Printing made it possible for more people to get educated and carry out scientific experiments. The discovery of the printing press was not without its drawbacks, however. Watch the short video below for an illustration of some of the problems that arose as the printing press grew in popularity. Christian religions across America are concerned about the effects of education on religiosity, and with good reason – past research shows a negative correlation between level of education and religiosity. In other words, data show that as level of education rises, level of religiosity drops. Here’s some data for all Christian religions.  However, there is one Christian religion that bucks this trend. For this religion there is a positive correlation, meaning that as education level rises, so does religiosity. That religion is Mormonism. This unusual positive correlation between education and religiosity among Mormons even made it into the Wiki article on “religiosity and intelligence”. Here’s some religiosity data for Mormons.  Why does Mormonism buck the trend that exists among other religions? I think that latter-day revelation on the importance of learning plays a role. The Lord has instructed us to “seek ye out of the best books words of wisdom; seek learning, even by study” (D&C 88:118). He is not just referring to scriptures here; He is referring to all good books. Christian religions that reject latter-day revelation have not accepted this instruction from the Lord - they have not gotten the message that the Lord wants us to continually learn. The LDS faith is also unique in the sense that it lays all its cards on the table. It encourages people to thoroughly explore its doctrines of salvation and the lifestyle it engenders among its members. It encourages people to study the Book of Mormon and revelations from the prophets – go ahead and scrutinize the teachings, ask questions in church classes, and talk with others about church doctrine. With regard to the doctrines of salvation, there is nothing to hide. The fact that educated Mormons score relatively high on measures of religiosity suggests that they are finding harmony between what they’ve learned in their studies of the gospel and in their studies of science, philosophy, arts, and literature. If this harmony did not exist, measures of religiosity would certainly be lower among educated Mormons. I have found much harmony between my religious and secular studies; these have strengthened my testimony. At the same time, however, I have found some inconsistencies, particularly between science and religion. Inconsistencies have not created a faith crisis in my life, nor should they. Inconsistencies between secular and religious learning should not be shunned – they should be sought out and explored with the understanding that secular knowledge is continually evolving, as is our knowledge of the mysteries of the kingdom of Heaven. Acknowledging inconsistencies between secular and religious learning is an important step in moving closer to the truth of all things. Sources of graphs: Princeton Religion Research Center Other sources: The Consequential Dimension of Mormon Religiosity, by Stan L. Albrecht; Secularization, Higher Education, and Religiosity, by Stan L. Albrecht and Tim B. Heaton.  It's nice when a living apostle of the Lord reiterates something that you have been saying. I am talking about Elder Oaks' recent warnings of growing secularism in academia. For the past few years I have been raising a warning signal of rampant secularism. I have spoken out against this problem in my science classes at BYU to the delight of many students and, unfortunately, to the dismay of some. I also spoke on this issue at the Mormons and Scholars in Humanities conference in Spring 2009 to the delight of a few conference goers and, surprisingly, to the dismay of several others. I’ve also written on rampant secularism in this blog to the displeasure of a few, not surprising given that many who post comments on my articles disagree with my conservative views. Well now an apostle of the Lord is saying some of the same things I have been saying. In a recent talk to a group of Harvard University students and faculty, elder Oaks warned that our nation’s superficial attitude toward Christianity is being exacerbated by secularism in the American university system. He stated that “with but few exceptions, colleges and universities have become value-free places where attitudes toward religion are neutral at best. Some faculty and administrators are powerful contributors to the forces that are driving religion to the margins of American society.” Elder Oaks stated some points in his talk that I’ve made in my presentations, namely acknowledging belief in the reality of God and spiritual existence, and acknowledging God as an arbiter of absolute truth. This last point is especially pertinent to modern science. By failing to recognize even the possibility of a supreme fundamental arbiter of truth, science is becoming increasingly relativistic in its search for truth.  I am not an evolutionist, but I like evolution. Some parts of the theory of evolution are really cool, like explaining variety within species and how bacteria become antibiotic resistent. At the same time, however, some aspects of the theory are on shaky ground and apparently inconsistent with mainstream LDS theology. The notion that mankind evolved from lower life forms is one example. But as is the case with most scientific theories, you take the good with the bad. I am not an intelligent designer, but I like Intelligent Design (ID). The thing I like best about ID is that its central theme is consistent with LDS theology. According to Intelligentdesign.org, “The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.” This statement sounds really good to me. It is a welcome breath of fresh air in an increasingly secular and godless science. But as we shall see below, ID also has its problems. Proponents of ID and evolution are currently in conflict with each other. Philosopher of science Thomas Kuhn might have called it a Revolution, but I am going to dispense with the academic jargon and use a more vibrant description: a boxing match. That right, right now there is a big slug fest going on between evolution and ID. Here is a description of the boxing match thus far. Announcer: Ladies and gentlemen, let’s get ready to rumble!!!!!!!!! Welcome to the science battle royale! In the left corner we have evolution’s goliath. He weighs in at 150 years of hegemony in the natural sciences. In the right corner we have the upstart Intelligent Design. ID weighs in at 10 years of “can’t get no respect” in the natural sciences. As the two boxers meet in center ring to receive instructions, evolution bounces up and down in anticipation. Evolution points at ID and tauntingly says: “I own you! You’re mine! You’re going down, punk!” ID looks up in stoic fashion and doesn’t respond. After the opponents move back to their corners, evolution looks at the audience and shouts, “I pity the fool! He don’t belong in the same ring as me.” (Bell rings) Ding Ding Evolution comes out swinging with: “You’re not science! You’re repackaged creationism! Dover! Scopes! Monkey Trial! Pandas and People! Take that, you fool! Arrgh!” Many of the punches hit their mark, but ID is still standing. After the first round coach Dave says to ID: “You’ve got to publish in mainstream journals. Expunge creationist influences; they are not scientific. Don’t use legislation to gain access into schools. And above all, avoid embarrassing trials and text books! ” (Bell rings) Ding Ding Evolution comes out swinging with: “You say evolution lacks scientific rigor and should not be taught in schools? Well then you’re not getting into our universities! You ain’t even getting in BYU and Notre Dame, sucker! No grants! No tenure! No faculty positions! No research positions! No soup for you! Argh!” ID took a serious beating during that round. His right eye is swollen and he has trouble seeing. “Cut me!” he begs. Coach Dave grabs a razor blade and reduces the swelling by cutting above the eye. After patching the wound, coach Dave turns to ID and says: “Stop trying to restrict evolutionary education. You are not going to get ahead by stepping on evolutionists. Prove your metal by producing solid, scientific work!” (Bell rings) Ding Ding Now ID comes out swinging with credible science methodology. It is deflecting evolution’s punches by not limiting evolutionary education. It is also avoiding embarrassing books and court cases. It has learned that if it is going to gain respect in science, it must do so through scientific means. No one knows the outcome of this match. One thing is certain, however; it is going to be a difficult struggle for ID. Evolution is much larger and hits harder, but ID has one advantage that most evolutionists are unaware of; it is that most evolutionists have a prideful and arrogant attitude toward their theory. This pride among evolutionists may prove its downfall. In the Bible, Job teaches us that pride cometh before the fall, which you could say, in boxing terms, translates into "the bigger they are, the harder they fall." We'll have to wait and see. EVOLUTION: THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND THE UGLY 05/27/2009
 The Good Unlocking the secret of evolution, which is that natural selection acts on random genetic mutations, has greatly enriched our understanding of the natural world. This understanding has lead to scientific breakthroughs in genetics, medicine, pharmaceuticals, computer science, and in learning how variation arises within species. These breakthroughs have had a positive impact on our society, whether we realize it or not (Source: Scientific American, January, 2009 issue). The Bad The theory of evolution contains theoretical assumptions about the world that are inconsistent with the doctrines of the restored gospel. At a fundamental level, evolution is mechanistic. By mechanistic I mean that evolution makes two ontological assertions about the fundamental nature of the natural world, namely materialism and efficient causation. Materialism is the belief that the fundamental nature of the world is physical material. Everything that truly exists is made up of matter. In a manner of speaking, what matters is matter. There is no such thing as the non-physical. Spirits are not real, neither are your thoughts, emotions, and personal sense of identity - these are nothing more than the actions of electrochemical processes in your nervous system. Efficient causation is the belief that events or change result from natural laws acting on physical material. There are no supernatural, spiritual, or cognitive sources of change. Also there is no purpose or agency in events; there are just the unintentional forces of nature which determine how matter is to behave. Mother Nature is like a blind watch maker that creates a beautifully complex world without a purpose or goal in mind. The Ugly Unfortunately we cannot simply pay attention to the Good while ignoring the Bad in evolution because the Bad has ugly consequences. The Bad provides an impetus for people to not believe in God. According to a 2005 Rice University survey by Elaine Howard-Eckland, 66% of all scientists surveyed said that they believed in God. Pretty good. But when the researchers divided the survey responses by area of expertise, namely natural vs. social science, they found startling differences. Natural scientists are less likely to believe in God than are social scientists. Other studies support these results. According to a 1998 survey of members of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), nearly 95% of biologists are either atheists or agnostics, much higher than all scientists in general! (SOURCE: Larry Witham, Where Darwin Meets the Bible (New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.) Similarly, according to a 2003 Cornell survey of leading evolutionists, a whopping 87% deny existence of God, 88% disbelieve in life after death, and 90% reject idea that evolution directed toward “ultimate purpose!” (SOURCE: Gregory W. Graffin and William B. Provine, Evolution, Religion and Free Will, American Scientist, vol. 95 (July-August 2007.) And according to a 2007 national survey of faculty at colleges and universities, more than 60% of all college biologists consider themselves atheists or agnostics! (SOURCE: Neil Gross and Solon Simmons, How Religious are America’s College and University Professors? Feb. 6, 2007.) The scriptures teach us that “by their fruits ye shall know them.” It appears that one of the fruits of the theory of evolution is atheism, or it may be that evolution biology attracts atheists. I expect that both are true, but given that, as President Ezra Taft Benson observed, “Students at universities are sometimes so filled with the doctrines of the world they begin to question the doctrines of the [Lord’s] gospel,” it is fairly safe to conclude that evolution is driving some people away from God. So what should we do? Well we can’t just stop teaching evolution; it is an important part of science (look at the “Good”). As a scientific theory it has its faults, but that is no reason to stop teaching evolution either. If we start restricting science education to only theories that are perfect, soon there would be no theories left to teach. Science is not perfect. It is an ever progressing and self-correcting manmade endeavor. From an LDS perspective, I think the key is to make LDS youngsters aware of the mechanistic assumptions underlying evolution. We commit a grave injustice by pretending that evolution is free from faults, especially those faults that are at odds with the gospel. More importantly, we need to help our youth develop a strong testimony of the gospel so that they will not be deceived by evolution’s atheistic allure. In other words, the perfect mix is a good understanding of evolution (including its underlying assumptions) and a strong testimony of the gospel. With a sound understanding of evolution and the gospel, we can celebrate the Good without fearing the Bad and the Ugly. I have been unpleasantly surprised by intellectualizations among some mormon scholars. In the scholarly context, an intellectualization is using excessive reasoning to avoid anxiety that arises from confronting legitimate gospel arguments that challenge one’s secular, scholarly viewpoints. GOD IS DISPLEASED WITH SECULAR SCIENCE 03/09/2009
 Most scientists would agree that there are numerous mysteries about the natural world yet to be discovered. Most would agree that the way to discover those mysteries is with rigorous scientific research. And most would also agree that God has nothing to do with uncovering the mysteries of the natural world. On this last point they are wrong. MORMON SCHOLARS IN THE HUMANITIES 03/03/2009
 Mormon Scholars in the Humanities is an association that explores the relationship between religious and secular scholarship. Last year their annual conference was held at Southern Virginia University. This year’s conference will be held on May 8th and 9th at BYU Provo and Aspen Grove, Utah.  In aviation it’s called a “course correction”. When a flight crew realizes that they’ve deviated from the pre-established direction of flight, they correct their course. | Welcome to the Religion and Science (R&S) Blog. Feel free to post your comments. Please be courteous.    CategoriesAll ArchivesJanuary 2012 |
RSS Feed