Brief Notes from Class Discussion on 14 September
Lecture: “The Kitzmiller Case”
Reading: Margaret Talbot, “Darwin in the Dock”.
The following notes are phrases, keywords and questions from the class discussion. Hopefully, these brief notes
will act jog your memory of our discussion. The class discussion may play a role in future discussions, question
formation exercises, and the exams.
Central question: How should we challenge a scientific theory?
A good question?
Human nature is to question? We criticize, question what’s been done …
Science, by definition, is falsifiable (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability). We should
challenge science.
We challenge, we should challenge, science by presenting counter-evidence — e.g., missing
links, evidentiary gaps in evolutionary theory.
Regarding the conduct of the Kitzmiller case
The judge and jury need to know what they’re doing … watch for bias.
What is the role of scientific experts? Should we convene a scientific board to review the
case — a board perhaps made up of Nobel prize voters, or scientific researchers—they have
degrees, expertise.
Expertise serves as a guide
For some people it’s the degree (academic expertise) vs. the person )personal
character. Do we simply trust someone’s experience? Is trust subjective?
The use of the term ‘theory’ in Kitzmiller and other scientific controversies
Theory and evidence—“theory” isn’t fully convincing … “convincing enough”
What’s the problem with experts?
We have other people do the thinking for us. Society is complex, we need to
distribute the thinking, the “cognitive burden”—individuals cannot embody all that
we need to know, we outsource it to devices (computers, smart phones and people).
Why not give Intelligent Design (ID) a chance?
We don’t control nature
ID is unscientific— it doesn’t rule out impossibility …
ID can (depending on the designer) make humans special, gives humans a purpose.
Evolutionary theory makes humans just like other animals—other animals have
language, form societies, procreate, use tools.
Are humans special because we’re curious? We want to know how things.
Knowledge is power and humans are more powerful.
Perhaps we’re special because we reflect, we wonder about our purpose. But is
human purpose a question for science to answer? Isn’t purpose a philosophical or
religious question?