ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

Was That Really A Reasonable Proposal?

Craig Svensson's view (The Scientist, January 26, p. 12) that one particular version of the sacred writings of one of the world's many religions is the sole arbiter of truth, and thus that the truth of any observation, logical deduction, or integrating hypothesis can be assessed only by comparison with those particular writings, must seem to most of us to be intellectually parochial. Nevertheless, I have no doubt that Svensson is sincere in believing himself to be reasonable and open-minded when

Daniel Atkinson
Craig Svensson's view (The Scientist, January 26, p. 12) that one particular version of the sacred writings of one of the world's many religions is the sole arbiter of truth, and thus that the truth of any observation, logical deduction, or integrating hypothesis can be assessed only by comparison with those particular writings, must seem to most of us to be intellectually parochial. Nevertheless, I have no doubt that Svensson is sincere in believing himself to be reasonable and open-minded when he proposes that any aspect of science with which he disagrees on religious grounds should be excised from the public school curriculum. That is evenhanded, he implies; don't teach my kids your science and I won't teach your kids my religion. It doesn't matter how few people feel as he does, he says; no matter how small a minority he may be, he has a right to...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to digital editions of The Scientist, as well as TS Digest, feature stories, more than 35 years of archives, and much more!
Already a member?
ADVERTISEMENT