Skip to main content

Reply to comment

There's more to it

January 13, 2008 by Benedikt Terhechte (not verified), 1 year 45 weeks ago
Comment: 26934

If one analyzes the creationism / Intelligent Design Discussions, that is the development of the idea and the basic corresponding arguments, one can use the instruments offered by numerous sociological theories. According to Jürgen Habermas, founding father of the well-known theory of the importance of an public sphere which allows open discussion of political matters and can thus influence the political system through public agenda setting, modern society inherits (based on the differentation of society in functional parts) a strong problem through the separation and shielding of the political, scientific and cultural systems into worlds of it's own which allow only experts to join the discussion. This means that, for example in modern science, most "normal" people lack the abilities to "learn" and "understand" all the basics and theories which are necessary to understand, discuss and rationaly judge the systems output. This means, that "ordinary" people, not being able to access the scientific argumentation, base their ideas and "life" on traditional ideas. On everything which stays in their system, after science, culture, politics, etc differentiated.
So if creationists try to counterclaim the theory of evolution, their arguments aren't based on scientific facts, but on traditional knowledge (like the bible, or even worse) *because* (and this is the important part) according to Jürgen Habermas theory, it was their lack of access to those scientific facts that directly led to the genesis of their ideas. This is the reason why their arguments always end up like "God said it, i believe it". Their accessing the full scientific system of knowledge would of course enlighten them in such a way, that the dispute would end (for example, they would understand, what a scientific theory actually *is*). Coming back to this actualy Blog entry, it would mean that, if they would use the above information for their cause (and totally understand the information and the theory around it) they wouldn't have a cause anymore.
I hope I could make myself clear, english is hardly my native tongue.

Reply



About us

Science Blog was started in August 2002. It lives, breathes and eats press releases from research organizations around the globe. Most of what you read here are press releases from the outfits named in the stories themselves. Got a news story you think belongs here? Let's talk. The other half of the equation is blog posts from readers like you. So if you have an interest in science, please register and join others like you in an ongoing, vibrant dialog about what makes the world tick. Meantime, please take a minute to read our Privacy Policy and Site Disclaimer.


Premium Drupal Themes by Adaptivethemes