Let’s imagine a hypothetical (and admittedly implausible) scenario, in which some new information comes to light – whether through scientific investigation, or from a booming voice from a burning bush – showing that in fact the intelligent design crowd, or even the young-earth creationists, were right, and it turns out that evolution is utterly inadequate as an explanation for the development of life on this planet.
The vast majority of scientists would still, in that case, have nothing to be ashamed of. Evolution is absolutely the best conclusion one can draw on the basis of the evidence currently available. There is, at present, no viable scientific alternative, despite what some claim. There is no shame in working with the best available understanding, nor in overturning that understanding in light of new, unexpected discoveries.
The YECs and cdesign proponentsists, on the other hand, should be ashamed even if they turned out to be right. Because in the realm of science, and in the realm of honest discourse in general, it isn’t whether your opinion or conviction happens to be right. It is how you reached your conclusion that matters. If someone picks a view of the universe because it makes them feel good, and doesn’t care about the evidence, the fact that they happened to pick the one that was right doesn’t mean for a moment that they made an intelligent, honest, careful, well thought out choice. The ID and YEC proponents have engaged in trickery and deceit, sleight of hand and misrepresentation of the facts. These things are utterly shameful behavior, even in the service of a viewpoint that happens to be correct.
Lest I be misunderstood, in view of the overwhelming evidence (which young-earth deceptionists and cdesign proponentsists dishonestly say doesn’t exist or isn’t persuasive) it is becoming increasingly improbable that the above scenario could ever actually happen. But science is always open ended – and that is the point. Creationists of the sorts mentioned in this post are not doing science, because they know the conclusions they want to draw and will let no evidence or logic prevent them from doing so.
When it comes to science, however, and when it comes to honesty, it isn’t whether you win or lose that matters. It is how you play the game.
Let’s apply the same thing to the “culture war” surrounding this subject – the battle for dominance not in terms of the scientific consensus but in terms of influencing the public. Could intelligent design’s vocal advocates potentially persuade a majority of people in this country or even the world? It is certainly possible. But I ask those Christians who have listened only to that side and have accepted it because they want it to be true: Are you really committed to “winning” at any cost? If honesty and “fair play” are sacrificed, can it really be called a victory?
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In