"Except for the point, the still point, there would be no dance, and there is only the dance." ~ T.S. Eliot in "Burnt Norton"

Sunday, March 10, 2013


We spent last class watching Creation, a film depicting the life of Charles Darwin. One very important aspect of the film was Darwin’s struggle to reconcile science with religion. He faced push-back from the church, his friends, and his devout wife. These conflicts are minor when compared to his own internal struggle as a man of faith. The following scene between Darwin (Paul Bettany) and his wife (Jennifer Connelly) illuminates that very struggle.


The readings that were assigned to us before break discuss the idea that evolution does not contradict the biblical idea of creationism, but rather enforces it in many ways. Paley and Mivart go to great lengths to argue that evolution can be viewed as a mechanism of divine creation.

Which of these teachings (creationism or evolution) has been reinforced most in your schooling, home life, and social life? Have the readings persuaded you to believe that evolution and creationism can be reconciled? Why or why not?

19 comments:

  1. I think this is an extremely interesting question. First, I grew up Catholic and attended Catholic school. Obviously given this and all we have studied this semester, it would appear that I should have been in line with fact that evolution and faith are compatible. Moreover, there should be no issue with the fact that Adam and Eve as well as much of the Old Testament is seen more metaphorically with a historical understanding of the time period it was written. However, I think growing up, for the majority of the time, this was not the case. The story of Adam and Eve is seemingly beaten into the heads of all Christians from a young age and because of that, it only seems likely that we should take it literally. I never thought to question it's validity in middle school or even in my home life. However, as time went on, I believe it was my Sophomore year when a classmate brought the subject up. Our religion teacher told us the Catholic viewpoint (a la evolution and faith are compatible). This was the first time I came to this realization so I think it's interesting how "in the dark" many in the Catholic and other Christian faiths are kept in regards to this issue, especially growing up. The readings in class, especially the ones that really align with reason and religion, have been extremely important in my continuation and understanding of this topic. I think from Barbour's ideas onward, it has given me a better glimpse of how to view the dynamic between the subjects.

    ReplyDelete
  2. As Brendan pointed out this is a very intriguing question, and one that I think will always stem conversation and potentially argument. I also was raised Catholic, attending Catholic school since kindergarten. Throughout the years, even into high-school Creation was a topic that was discussed continuously. However, evolution was included in these discussions. While evolution may have been brought up minimally in a science course or two, a relationship between science and faith, and specifically evolution and creationism were never identified but simply ignored. However, coming from a fiercely scientific family, I would say that the concept of evolution was more frequently discussed than that of creationism. This scientific background and interest, despite my Catholic upbringing, is largely the reason why I have continuously struggled with the relationship between religion and science, and even more broadly with the general acceptance of religion. However, I believe this course has opened my eyes to the possibility of dialogue between the two fields, specifically between evolution and creation, to better understand the combinations and resolutions of such concepts that allow people to maintain religious faith. While I consider myself more educated on the potential reconciliation of evolution and creation, personally, as a scientist, agnostic, and religious pluralist I still struggle to accept it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. *evolution was never included in these discussions.

      Delete
  3. Creationism and evolution have their own explanation about the world, human begin. People, who live in the early period of time, were limited of contacting with different sources. When the science was raised up, it hard to people to accept the new things that make them give up what they have believed for a long time ago. With me, more luckily, was born in the society in which the science looks like spreading everywhere; also I live in the full functional education. So I have more chance to learn the things from different sides. My family believes in divines (in Buddhism) just for receiving the protection and hope, but they still use the scientific idea to explain the things happened in the world. That is the way the religious and science live with us. So with the creationism and evolution, I think there is always the ways that make them reinforced if people have open mind. Depend on each opinion of each people, people have their own direction to follow. I am always interested in with the idea that we can consider the evolution as a mechanism of divine creation.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think it's really interesting that we have such similar experiences. I, like Gillian and Brendan, was also raised Catholic. However, I never attended a catholic school and my family isn't particularly devout. So it was really easy for me to mesh the two ideas at a young age. The fashion in which I have reconciled the two, however, has changed as I have matured. A follow-up question I have is do you all think it is at all possible to integrate the two early on in institutional education?

    ReplyDelete
  5. This is a very though provoking question. Personally while I was raised a Catholic by my parents who are fairly religious (they took me to church and I started in Catholic school) I would not categorize myself as a practicing Catholic or Christian but not an atheist either (probably more agnostic than anything). Most of my friends are also atheists but I feel their perspectives of what constitutes atheism are a bit inconsistent. Personally I don’t know if I can fully accept or reject both creationism and Darwin’s theory of evolution. As a former biology major I can tell you Darwin himself as noted in the film had problems explaining the entirety of his theory such as the rate or path that natural selection occurs at or slight variations in species and that certain levels of variations cannot be exceeded (Darwin even writes Chapters about some of his problems in the origin of species).
    However, personally I feel at ease with a mix of evolution and creation views, as stated previously faith and science are not mutually exclusive to one another. Either way the origin of species plays little on my outlook on my life or my morality. However, I was admired with Darwin’s fascination in discovering and understanding as much about human origin and species’ adaptability. Finally I still don’t think that any of the readings have brought me any closer to “picking” a side. While I find myself largely Agnostic I don’t think I will ever rule out believing in God or elements of the supernatural, or even following the Judaic Christian God (or vise-versa).

    ReplyDelete
  6. I never attended a Catholic school until I came to CUA. Growing up, I cannot say that a creationist perspective was enforced in my life at any point along the way. Even in church, I was never told that Genesis was to be interpreted literally. Of course, we read the Bible and discussed the passages involving the creation story, but I was never given the idea that science was "wrong" and Christianity was "right." Of course most of my education on creation was received through my schooling, which focused entirely on evolution. In regards to a reconciliation between the two fields, I think that it is certainly possible and, to a large extent, has already happened. The Catholic church is very open minded to the discussion of many scientific practices. However, there will always be a small group that will disagree with the progressive approach that many see as the truth.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Growing up in China where Western religion is not very popular, Creationism was obviously not taught in schools at all. I have never learned anything about religion, especially Catholicism until I came to CUA. I went to a non-Catholic high school in Arlington, VA. In history classes, we would go over world religions but that's it.

    I also do not remember learning the evolution theory in depth. The theory is mostly mentioned in class discussions but never really taught to us. However, I do remember when I was in kindergarten and elementary school back in China, we believed that humans evolved from apes. Later on there were questions about whether we evolved from animals other than apes. I did not even know there existed such a theory like Creationism.

    I guess I can say that the evolution theory is kind of like common sense to me because of where I grew up. Although schools I went to never taught religion, they also did not teach against it. Therefore, I accept evolution theory as common sense and also accept Creationism as a way of viewing the world. To me these two do not conflict each other because there are just two ways thinking.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I grew up Muslim and I came from a Muslim society. In my country, Saudi Arabia, Islam is taught in public and private schools, starting from from first grade and until college. Courses that teach Islam has the same importance as the science classes like, mathematics physics and chemistry. Islam, from my point of view, does not conflict with science, they both relate to each other and they complete each other. Although the theory of evolution was never brought up in any of my science classes, Islam , in fact, did not deny nor reject the theory. This course made me open my mind to all the possible relationships that can exist between science and religion. It also teaches me how other religions view science.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The comments above bear personal witness to multiple different perspectives on this very timeless creation/evolution discussion. I am most "intrigued," however, by those perspectives which differ from my own, as they present a totally different frame from which to define existence, meaning, purpose, the universe, and the miracle of human life. My exposure to these varying perspectives is brief, as I too have been raised in a Catholic house and Catholic schools all my life. Based on this upbringing I submit that western Catholic values have been largely open the shared truths of creation and evolution, yet hesitates in common culture to delve into the deeper meanings behind this marriage. There is a tendency to avoid conflict and tedious study with a brief conclusion that both ideologies are true and they'll just have to agree-to-disagree. Charles Darwin appears in his work "The Origin of Species" to have a similar western disposition that science and religion are joined (a notion of dialogue not yet shared by the society around him as noted in the film), and begins to take first steps into the in-depth study of their mutual relationship. For Darwin, this study begins from the scientific perspective - it is part of his upbringing, his profession, and matches most closely with his preformed dispositions on rationality (the way he defines life, the universe, everything). For others, there are ways to analyze the relationship from a religious and cultural angle, as noted in the Buddhist and Muslim perspectives above. My personal journey of discovery has only begun to scratch at the complexities of Eastern culture ("The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel" and a knowledge of Middle-Eastern architecture hardly capture the rich depth of spiritual intellect) - yet each pursuit reveals a new lens from which to reevaluate the nature of life and the Divine. For me, the very real spiritual culture of the Middle and Far East strengthen the relationship of creation and evolution by revealing a means by which to study the relationship from a religious and social perspective. I feel this pseudo-philosophical view on life, religion, and science is more more prevalent in the early authors we've discussed: Aquinas and Augustine - as both address the purpose of science and religion as related to culture and lifestyle.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I attened public school my entire life, until college. However every tuesday I would attened religion classes. It was at these tueday classes I was tought creationism. Although I did attened public school not much was tought about evolution, assuming it was a touching subject. My family being catholic I alawys just assumed that creationism was correct. Once i reached an older age i begain exploring my faith more. It lead me to question religion all together, leaning towrds atheism. However the last two semesters at college I have taken courses that have tought me other wise. My philosophy of God class, and this theology course have tought me that religion and science are not seperate. Also that there is a logical explanation to the exsistence of God. The readings and lectures in this class have tought me that creationism and evolution can be reconciled.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I was never really taught specifically either one except what I learned in sunday school classes and such (creation). I never really spent a lot of time thinking of evolution and creation as two distinct concepts. Ironically I was not taught more on the subject at my catholic high school. Over time, however, I came to the conclusion on my own that both evolution and creation do not need to be in conflict; rather I asked my myself "Why couldn't evolution derive from creation?" The readings helped me solidify that kind of mentality.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Throughout most of my school life, which occurred in public school, I was not really taught about creation in any meaningful way. However, if I could wager a guess, evolution would be the view my teachers subscribed to. In my home life, I was raised according to catholic tradition and although I learned the creation stories, I didn't really take these to face value as some of my peers did. The reason why I think creationism and evolution can be reconciled together is through the fact that I was taught to neither negate or subscribe to any one idea. The openness evident in my teaching played into my ability to be open to the theories in this science and technology course as well as my other philosophy classes. I developed my views largely in a metaphysics class i took last semester. It showed me that science and religion are not separate but intertwined in mutual understanding. The readings for today further solidify this sentiment and the goal of the course, to prove science and religion do not need to be in conflict. Hence evolution as the mechanism for creation.

    ReplyDelete
  13. As a child I was taught to believe whatever it was that I thought people came from, my parents never told me what to believe or what not to believe. As I grew older they taught evolution in high school (I went to public school all my life) but they did also talk about creationism. For me though there is no question about which one I believe in, evolution, that most likely stems from the fact that I have taken a lot of science courses and it is the option that seems the most realistic to me.

    ReplyDelete
  14. My whole family is Catholic. I had grown up by Catholic stories from my parents, so religion is an important part of my life. I had thought that the Creationism and Evolution are conflict until i chose to study engineering. It have been tough for me to understand the relationship between the religion and science that exists in my internal life. When i was studied about evolution, i felt that is absolutely conflict to what i have believed in Creationism. The more time i study about science, the better i understand the relationship between religion and science. Religion and science are just two different aspects of same thing. Evolution and Creationism can be reconciled. That is also what the reading and lecture taught me:"evolution can be viewed as a mechanism of divine creation".

    ReplyDelete
  15. I was raised in a Catholic home, went to Catholic school all my life, and attended Chruch regularly. I consider myself to be a practicing Catholic and my faith plays a large role in my life. Regarding creationism and evolution, I cannot remember if evolution was ever taught outright or even mentioned. On the other hand, creationism is something that was taught in school but not to an extreme. I remember learning very early on that Genesis isn't an actual account of creation. I had also learned that while God created everything, that doesn't mean science is wrong. What i found in my Catholic education is a balance between the two. Yes, religion may have been emphasized a bit more than science, but science was never refuted outright. Personally, I believe that evolution played a role in the development of the world, but I also believe that God played a key role in our creation and is still active in the world today.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Why do you guys think, prior to the last century or so, that the church was so close-minded towards evolution? Do you think it was because of the possibility of scientific error or denial that, possibly, the bible was not scientifically correct?

    ReplyDelete
  17. I was raised Catholic my whole life, but never attended a Catholic school until I came to CUA. When I was a child I did go to Catechism for a few years until I did my first communion and then later, I took a few more classes until I did my Confirmation ( I was 12) . But after that I only attended church on Sundays. My public school education never mentioned Creation or Evolution. The topics of evolution had been broken up into different individual subjects. I don't think that I got the full picture until I was much older. For some reason I never really thought to put the two together. I think its because Religion was always discussed in spanish. I always attended the spanish mass, my classes were taught in spanish, I only know my prayers in spanish and I took half of my classes in Mexico and thats where I did my confirmation. On the other side of things, all topics rolving around Evolution were always discussed in English, at school, with friends,etc. I am not sure why but I tend to compartmentalize certain things and so Religion and Evolution have never been brought together for me until this class. I do think that these two topics should be able come together, but I think that it is going to take a little leeway between both sides. I can't see why it couldn't work, but then again I haven't had to consider the two for very long.

    ReplyDelete
  18. While Darwinism was initially considered to be in direct conflict with the Church, Darwin’s theory was able to be considered and incorporated into the Church’s teaching. Barbour describes this progressive integration through the reformulation of certain doctrines. The Church was able to identify with Darwin’s theory because he was able to explain that his findings were the product of intelligent design. The Church validated adaptation and natural selection. The Church believes that “design was said to be present not in the particular structures of individual organisms but in the properties of matter and the laws of nature through which the evolutionary process could produce such organisms.” The complexity of this design is believed to enough proof that it is in fact the work of God.
    Paley and Mivart reinforce Darwin’s claims that evolution clearly exhibits the divine work of God. Paley offers a brilliant analogy between our creation and the creation of a watch. The mechanics of a watch are extremely complex in design. To make an object so intricate, there must be a designer. Paley argues that like the watch, a designer must have created this universe and the organisms within it. I believe that Paley’s explanation is plausible and reinforces my belief in divine creation. It is difficult for me to wrap my mind around our existence being a series of random and spontaneous events without a creator of some sort. The clip offered truly captures this internal struggle.

    ReplyDelete