Article archive / April 1, 2013
Originally published: . Volume 4, No. 8. Source pages: 2.
Letter to the Editor
March 24, 2013 RE: Letter to the Editor
(Editor’s note: In our February 2013 issue we reprinted a Letter to the Editor from Dr. Tom Hannie to the Baton Rouge Advocate. Below, Dr. David Williams wrote the Times regarding Dr. Hannie’s views. We thank both gentlemen for their contributions.
In Dr. Hannie's recent editorial, he stated that religion is religion, science is science, evolution is within science, and intelligent design is within religion. Dr. Hannie asserted that because intelligent design is within the set of religion and that since evolution is within the set of science, evolution but not intelligent design should be taught in school. I maintain that Dr. Hannie confused ontology (order of being) with epistemology (order of knowing) which led to a category error. From this error, he generated erroneous conclusions about what should be taught to students.
Whether or not there is an intelligent designer of the natural world is an ontological question while what is science is an epistemological set that necessarily flows from either one or the other of those possible worlds. Therefore, the question of whether or not there is a designer is "first order" and the method and data of science (the theories and processes of how knowledge is obtained) is "second order." In other words, science is a discipline and method based on metaphysical assumptions where the goal is to investigate our world to derive an understanding of reality.
Consider that one primary presupposition for 'knowing' is that whatever corresponds to reality can be considered true. Further, people hold beliefs about what is and is not true. The question is not is there such a thing as religion or science. We universally accept that both concepts exist. The question is whether or not the physical universe was designed. When these ideas of reality and belief are applied to design, one can imagine a matrix where the y- axis is defined as what is actually true and the x axis is defined by belief of what is true. Along the y-axis, there are two possibilities: either it is reality that there is an intelligent designer or it is reality that there is not an intelligent designer. Along the x-axis, there are two possibilities: either one believes or does not believe in an intelligent designer.
So it follows that science and religion exist in either a reality that was designed or in a reality that was not designed. Science and religion make truth claims. These truth claims either do or do not correspond to reality. Furthermore, evolution is a concept identified by scientists. For the purpose of this article, I will not get into the macro vs. micro evolution debate, but will suffice it to say that evolution is a mechanism by which organisms adapt to survive that occurs independently of what one believes to be true about science or religion, but not independently of what is reality. Therefore, science is part of reality, religion is part of reality, and evolution is a part of reality. Reality is either defined by an intelligent designer or it is not.
Therefore, it is apparent that Dr. Hannie put forth a false dichotomy. Science is science and religion is religion; however, reality is reality. Science and religion are subsets within what is reality, so they are not mutually exclusive in so far as what is true about reality permeates both. So, school policy makers are well within their epistemological rights to teach first order hypotheses about reality as students are trained in the scientific disciplines. In fact, failing to teach both possible worlds can lead to the absurdity where students are trained to use science to discover reality while denying ad hoc the possible reality where there actually is an intelligent designer. A better solution for policy makers would be for them to include training on the metaphysics behind our scientific method along with courses on logic to facilitate a truly open minded and free thinking exploration of both possible worlds to best understand what is reality.
David J. Williams, PhD, MP Advanced Practice Medical Psychologist Monroe
Photo by NASA, Cassiopeia – a supernova remnant
This article is part of a historical newspaper archive. Read the original issue for its original layout, photographs and graphics.