Pulliam treats the matter in an either\/or way that misunderstands not only how science works but real life. Sure, there may be \u201craw data\u201d and \u201cspeculations\u201d, but in between there are also perfectly logical deductions from various pieces of evidence \u2013 what science calls \u201ctheories\u201d \u2013 which are no more a \u201cmere hunch\u201d than deducing from a person\u2019s fingerprints on a murder weapon, DNA from the crime scene, motive and various other pieces of evidence that the individual in question is guilty of murder.<\/p>\n
In short, it is only \u201cfaith\u201d in our ability to draw rational inferences and conclusions based on evidence that is required to accept evolutionary biology. Without that faith, there can be no science, no criminology, and basically no thinking that isn\u2019t just hunches and opinions. And so unless Pulliam thinks that thinking is a waste of time or misguided (which would obviously be a self-contradictory standpoint), then he really ought to inform himself better about modern science, and perhaps offer a better treatment of modern biology to his readers. Then again, perhaps Pulliam\u2019s own ill-reasoned article is itself evidence that reason cannot be trusted, that we are too prone to self-deception. Yet even so, it can be argued that scientific methods do a better job of helping us avoid such self-deception and poor reasoning than anything else available.<\/p>\n
One last thing. No scientist I\u2019ve ever encountered takes Darwin<\/em> on faith. Darwin\u2019s theory has been maintained where the evidence supports it, and modified where it doesn\u2019t. Evolutionary theory itself has evolved. Evolution, as it is understood today, isn\u2019t about Darwin or faith but about observation, evidence, deduction and reason. Those who deny this presumably have failed at some point in the chain of logic to either observe, to examine evidence, to reason or to deduce.<\/p>\n I missed a piece in the Indianapolis Star a couple of days ago, until a friend pointed it out to me today. Russ Pulliam\u2019s article, \u201cTaking Darwin On Faith\u201d, manages to muddle and confuse at least two issues. He quotes Richard Holdeman, who emphasizes that there is a problem in treating certain theological extrapolations from […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":136,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2064","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blogger.googleusercontent.com\/tracker\/7622297540113836091-3013569730352039425?l=exploringourmatrix.blogspot.com\")