Read Ebook {PDF EPUB} the Battle Over the Meaning of Everything Evolution Intelligent Design and a School Board in Dover P Gordy Slack Interview

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Read Ebook {PDF EPUB} the Battle Over the Meaning of Everything Evolution Intelligent Design and a School Board in Dover P Gordy Slack Interview Read Ebook {PDF EPUB} The Battle Over the Meaning of Everything Evolution Intelligent Design and a School Board in Dover P Gordy Slack interview. Gordy Slack was on the radio in the Bay Area yesterday and the show is now online. I haven’t listened to the whole thing yet but I’m sure it was good, since Gordy is quite a thoughtful guy. Gordy is also doing a reading at Books Inc. Opera Plaza, 601 Van Ness Ave. SF, CA, on Monday, 7/16. 7:00 pm – I might go myself if I get the chance… Fri, Jul 13, 2007 – 10:00 AM Author Gordy Slack Listen (RealMedia stream) Download (MP3) (Windows: right-click and choose “Save Target As.” Mac: hold Ctrl, click link, and choose “Save As.”) The show welcomes author Gordy Slack for a conversation focusing on his book, “The Battle over the Meaning of Everything: Evolution, Intelligent Design and a School Board in Dover, PA.” Host: Dave Iverson Guests: Gordy Slack , author of “The Battle over the Meaning of Everything: Evolution, Intelligent Design and a School Board in Dover, PA.” To see earlier posts, select the Archives at the top of this page. Recent Comments. To see the comment in context of the discussion click on the text that indicates how long ago the comment was posted, such as "2 hours ago". Then wait for the post and then the comments to load. Copyright © The Panda’s Thumb and original authors — Content provided under Creative Commons BY-NC-ND License 4.0. The Dover Books Cometh. Although only Humes’s book Monkey Girl is out, I was lucky enough to be interviewed for each of them, and have gotten to know the authors, and so I have an idea about which direction each one takes. Although they all center on the trial, each comes at it from a different angle, so you are just going to have to support the economy and buy all three. Ed Humes’s Monkey Girl is the crime drama version of the Kitzmiller case. Humes, who won a Pulitzer in 1989 for investigative reporting about the U.S. Military, reviews the evolution fights that have occurred around the country since 2000, when the ID movement started to get national attention during Kansas’s “Evolution War I” (“Evolution War I” was the fight over the deletion of evolution from Kansas’s science standards in 1999-2000; “Evolution War II” was 2004-2006 fight over ID-friendly science standards), and continuing through the No Child Left Behind Act , the Ohio Board of Education, etc., up to Dover. Humes gives a detailed anatomy of the case from the beginning – events which were crucial although this was not always clear at the time, and this trains readers up to understand how the dramatic moments at the trial came to pass. For example, a preliminary scuffle in the case was the issue of whether or not the plaintiffs would file for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) in January 2005. The plaintiffs took depositions of the key Dover Area School Board members to gather evidence, but Buckingham and Bonsell denied under oath that they had originally talked about “creationism” before they talked about “intelligent design” (despite the fact that this was explicitly reported in the newspapers), and they said they didn’t know who had donated the book Of Pandas and People . As a result, the plaintiffs declined to file for a TRO and moved forward with plans for a full trial with a full discovery period. Of course, it turned out that the board members were lying and this is what led to some of the fireworks at trial. The book is also excellent for the culture and historical context of the case – and a tour with a Pennsylvania geology guide gives the really deep background. Reviews and articles are already coming out about Monkey Girl , see edwardhumes.com, the York Dispatch , the York Daily Record (includes the “ruling” – the blurb – from the Hon. Judge John Jones III himself), Pharyngula, and a long and detailed review from Red State Rabble. Nick “Trial Geek” Matzke Watch: guess who one of the geeks is in the chapter entitled “Send Lawyers, Geeks and Money”? Matthew Chapman’s title was announced first (as far as I know), and he got the best one: 40 Days and 40 Nights . This is, of course, based on the banter at the very end of the fortieth day of the trial, which seemed to me to be clear proof that we were actually on a movie set and the director was about to jump out and yell “cut!” Chapman brings a unique perspective to the case as the great-great-great-great grandson of pottery magnate Josiah Wedgwood (not Wedgewood), perhaps better known as the great-great-grandson of Charles Darwin himself. The book is an expansion of Chapman’s article in Harper’s Magazine . As Chapman admits early on, he did not inherit the science proclivities that are common throughout the rest of the Darwin family. You do not read 40 days for ponderous analysis, you read it for the humor. Chapman’s specialty is character, and he manages to peg just about every participant with a few incisive remarks. The effect is hilarious, especially if you know the people involved. Plaintiffs’ attorney Steve Harvey? “[T]he best suits in the trial.” Eric Rothschild? “One might imagine that as a geeky child he had encountered some bullying and was not about to let it continue into adulthood.” During the trial, Chapman sat in the jury box with the other reporters and glowered at the ID witnesses. At least, that’s what I had thought he was doing. During the cross-examination of Scott Minnich, Harvey brought up the fact that Richard Bliss, an education specialist with the Institute for Creation Research, had been invoking the “intelligent design icon,” the bacterial flagellum, a generation ago. Most observers were thinking, “Wow, so that flagellum argument really isn’t new at all, is it?” But not Chapman. No, at that moment Chapman was focused on the question of what would possibly lead someone to name their child “Dick Bliss.” Nick “Trial Geek” Matzke Watch: guess who is described thusly: “usually looked as if he had just rolled out of bed.” True enough, I’m afraid. Finally, we have well-known science journalist Gordy Slack’s The Battle Over the Meaning of Everything: Evolution, Intelligent Design, and a School Board in Dover, PA . This book is not due out until May, but I’m sure it will be worth waiting for. For a preview, see his article for Salon.com on the Kitzmiller trial (this article, which got some amazing quotes from Richard Thompson, was cited in the trial transcript just a few days later, to the embarassment of the Defense). Gordy has a personal interest in the story: Some years back, his dad experienced a midlife crisis, was born again, and became a rabid ID fan in the early years of the ID movement. Slack, a science student and then a professional science journalist, was not very sympathetic to this, and the two of them have debated this issue for years. At one point, Slack senior even set up an appointment for father and son to have lunch with Phillip Johnson on the U.C. Berkeley campus. Of the three authors, I suspect Gordy may be closest to the PT posters and readers in terms of perspective, as someone who has tracked the ID movement and its forays into education, and who has personally wrestled with creationism and how to interact with creationist family members. Nick “Trial Geek” Matzke Watch: Too early to say, but in discussing my role in the case with Gordy, I said something about how the obscure obsession of a creationism-debating internet nerd suddenly became a special superpower that was amazingly relevant in a nationally-followed court case. The Devil in Dover - Darwin vs. Dogma in Small-Town America. All of these books are amazing, yes – but wait, there’s more! Intrepid local journalist Lauri Lebo (a.k.a. “Lois Lane”) has reportedly got a book deal of her own. (Added in edit - the working title is: The Devil in Dover - Darwin vs. Dogma in Small-Town America .) Since Lauri was on the ground from the beginning in the Dover area, and is likely all-knowing, we are certain to get something interesting from her. Lebo gave a speech at the Evolution 2006 meeting. Following several of the Kitzmiller participants who all gave academic-type talks with Powerpoint presentations, Lebo stood up and read a remarkable essay about what journalism is and what objectivity means in a journalistic context, and how these issues came up in the Kitzmiller v. Dover reporter’s maelstrom of editors, newspapers, the courts, scientists and PR guys, and the local community. That’s an incredibly dry description of what was actually a quite moving piece, but it gives you an idea. Lebo also has the “fundamentalist relative” issue in her background, which seems to provoke thoughtfulness. I’m also hoping for a segue on the famous Lebo Beer Can Museum. And still more. For those with more academic interests in the case, here are some items to watch out for: * God on Trial: Dispatches From America’s Religious Battlefields by Peter Irons, a polysci professor at UCSD. According to his description at amazon.com, Irons reviews a number of constitutional battles over church/state separation, and spends a chapter on the Dover case. Coming out May 17.
Recommended publications
  • The God Hypothesis
    CHAPTER 2 The God Hypothesis The religion of one age is the literary entertainment of the next. RALPH WALDO EMERSON THE GOD HYPOTHESIS 31 The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, fili- cidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully. Those of us schooled from infancy in his ways can become desensitized to their horror. A naif blessed with the perspective of innocence has a clearer perception. Winston Churchill's son Randolph somehow contrived to remain ignorant of scripture until Evelyn Waugh and a brother officer, in a vain attempt to keep Churchill quiet when they were posted together during the war, bet him he couldn't read the entire Bible in a fort- night: 'Unhappily it has not had the result we hoped. He has never read any of it before and is hideously excited; keeps reading quotations aloud "I say I bet you didn't know this came in the Bible ..." or merely slapping his side & chortling "God, isn't God a shit!"'16 Thomas Jefferson - better read - was of a similar opinion: 'The Christian God is a being of terrific character - cruel, vindictive, capricious and unjust.' It is unfair to attack such an easy target. The God Hypothesis should not stand or fall with its most unlovely instantiation, Yahweh, nor his insipidly opposite Christian face, 'Gentle Jesus meek and mild'. (To be fair, this milksop persona owes more to his Victorian followers than to Jesus himself.
    [Show full text]
  • Signature of Controversy
    I n “In this volume Granville Sewell provides “As the debate over intelligent design grows T delightful and wide-ranging commentary on increasingly heated... it is refreshing to find a HE the origins debate and intelligent design... discussion of the topic that is calm, thoughtful, Sewell provides much needed clarity on topics and far-ranging, with no sense of having to B e ignature f that are too often misunderstood. His discussion advance an agenda or decimate the opposition. G I S o of the commonly confused problem of entropy In this regard, Granville Sewell’s In the NNI is a must read.” Beginning succeeds brilliantly.” Cornelius G. Hunter, Ph.D. William A. Dembski, Ph.D. N author of The Design Inference author of Science’s Blind Spot G ontroversy A N c In this wide-ranging collection of essays on origins, mathematician Granville Sewell looks at the D big bang, the fine-tuning of the laws of physics, and the evolution of life. He concludes that while O there is much in the history of life that seems to suggest natural causes, there is nothing to support THER Responses to critics of signature in the cEll Charles Darwin’s idea that natural selection of random variations can explain major evolutionary E S advances (“easily the dumbest idea ever taken seriously by science,” he calls it). Sewell explains S A Y why evolution is a fundamentally different and much more difficult problem than others solved s ON by science, and why increasing numbers of scientists are now recognizing what has long been I obvious to the layman, that there is no explanation possible without design.
    [Show full text]
  • Intelligent Design”
    Professional Biologist Media Coverage of “Intelligent Design” JASON ROSENHOUSE AND GLENN BRANCH News media coverage of the controversy surrounding recent attempts to insert creationism into public school science curricula—this time in the form of “intelligent design”—has generated miles of copy and hours of television footage. The quality of that reporting varies widely, depending on the media outlet. Often, reporters with no scientific training are assigned to report on evolution–creationism controversies, which inevitably leads to distortions of the relevant science. A misconceived concern for balance frequently results in equal time being accorded to biologists and creationists, creating the illusion of scientific equivalence. At other times, a clear bias toward creationism is revealed, especially on cable television. Focusing mainly on recent treatments, this article analyzes and critiques specific stories, as well as trends and patterns in coverage in newspapers, magazines, and television; it concludes with suggestions of ways in which scientists can be more effective in dealing with the media. Keywords: evolution, intelligent design, media, creationism, education ncreasingly in the past few years, states and local ignore the fact that the creation scientists before them made Ischool districts have had to confront challenges to science similar claims of scientific rigor. education instigated by antievolutionists. Part of the reason Proponents of ID further claim that their methods, when for this surge of antievolution activity is the repackaging of applied to biological systems such as the human blood- creationism in the less overtly religious form of “intelligent clotting cascade, reveal that these complex systems must be design”(ID), which enjoys the support of a number of promi- the products of an intelligent agent.
    [Show full text]
  • The Roles, Reasons and Restrictions of Science Blogs
    Forum The roles, reasons and restrictions of science blogs John S. Wilkins* Department of Philosophy, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia Over the past few years, blogging (‘web logging’) has timely account of news in science, and relies not merely on become a major social movement, and as such includes press releases, which can be terribly misleading, but on the blogs by scientists about science. Blogs are highly idio- personal knowledge and expertise of the blogger. Papers syncratic, personal and ephemeral means of public that would otherwise be missed can be described and even expression, and yet they contribute to the current prac- critiqued within days. Some journals even send notifica- tice and reputation of science as much as, if not more tions to bloggers to ensure that their papers are seen and than, any popular scientific work or visual presentation. commented on. It is important, therefore, to understand this phenom- Blogging is also a way to demythologize science. Unlike enon. laws and sausages, the public should see science during its manufacture, but the lay public is generally ill-equipped to Introduction interpret what they see, and science bloggers play a crucial A blog is fundamentally a continuously updated web page, role here. Bloggers with a deeper knowledge of the topic, or with entries (‘posts’) that have date, time and, if many of science in general, can place studies in a context of prior authors contribute to the blog, author-name stamps work, thereby correcting or avoiding the myths and pigeon- (Figure 1). Each post may be commented upon by the holes of science journalism.
    [Show full text]
  • Jennifer Forester, Faculty Mentor
    Pics or It Didn’t Happen: Sexist Hyperskepticism in the Modern Skeptical Movement Author: Jennifer Forester, Faculty Mentor: Clark Pomerleau, Ph.D., Department of English, College of Arts and Sciences Department and College Affiliation: Department of English, College of Arts and Sciences Pics or It Didn’t Happen 2 Bio: Jennifer Forester graduated summa cum laude from the University of North Texas with a bachelor’s degree in English with a specialization in writing and rhetoric. Jennifer was a member of the Honors College. She presented her research at University Scholars Day in April 19, 2013. She is proud of her service in the United States Marine Corps where she was a Corporal (Bandsman, Armorer) in Cherry Point, North Carolina. She is a mother of two brilliant, if often unruly, children. Her current plan is to find gainful employment, but promises that she will eventually return to college and obtain her doctorate in rhetoric with a particular focus on the ways that rhetorical studies can be applied to social justice. Pics or It Didn’t Happen 3 Abstract: In the skeptical community, there is an ongoing conflict over what—if any—actions are necessary to make the movement more welcoming to the growing numbers of women in its ranks. This conflict has brought a great deal of antifeminist sentiment to the surface, to include rape and death threats against prominent women who speak affirmatively on feminist issues within organized skepticism. The origins of this problem can be found in the grounding of skeptical dialogue on the superiority of a traditionally masculinized ideal of science and reason, which excludes the feminized personal narratives that serve as evidence for mistreatment of women within the community.
    [Show full text]
  • The Top Ten Scientific Problems with Biological and Chemical Evolution
    The Top Ten Scientific Problems with Biological and Chemical Evolution Casey Luskin “There are no weaknesses in the theory of evolution.”1 Such was professed by Eugenie Scott, the de facto head of the Darwin lobby, while speaking to the media in response to the Texas State Board of Education’s 2009 vote to require students to learn about both the scientific evidence for and against neo-Darwinian evolution. For those who follow the debate over origins, Dr. Scott’s words are as unsurprising as they are familiar. It seems that almost on a daily basis, we find the news media quoting evolutionary scientists declaring that materialist accounts of biological and chemical evolution are “fact.” Students who take college-preparatory or college-level courses on evolution are warned that doubting Darwinism is tantamount to committing intellectual suicide—you might as well proclaim the Earth is flat.2 Such bullying is enough to convince many that it’s much easier on your academic standing, your career, and your reputation to just buy into Darwinism. The few holdouts who remain are intimidated into silence. But is it true that there are “no weaknesses” in evolutionary theory? Are those who express doubts about Darwinism displaying courage, or are they fools that want to take us back to the dark ages and era of the flat Earth?3 Thankfully, it’s very easy to test these questions: all one must do is examine the technical scientific literature and inquire whether there are legitimate scientific challenges to chemical and biological evolution. This chapter will review some of this literature, and show that there are numerous legitimate scientific challenges to core tenets of Darwinian theory, as well as predominant theories of chemical evolution.
    [Show full text]
  • How Supporters of Evolution Encourage Violations of the Establishment Clause
    ZEAL FOR DARWIN’S HOUSE CONSUMES THEM: HOW SUPPORTERS OF EVOLUTION ENCOURAGE VIOLATIONS OF THE ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE Casey Luskin† I. INTRODUCTION The common stereotype in the controversy over teaching evolution holds that it is the opponents of evolution who are constantly trying to “sneak religious dogma back into science education.”1 While perhaps in some instances this caricature is not entirely undeserved,2 the mainstream media and legal community pay scant attention to incidents where proponents of Darwinian evolution transgress the boundary between church and state erected by the Establishment Clause. By documenting ways that evolution advocates encourage violations of the Establishment Clause—in some instances, explicitly advocating state endorsement of pro-evolution religious viewpoints in the science classroom—this Article will show the impropriety of the common “Inherit the Wind stereotype.”3 To be sure, one area where proponents of evolution do not violate the Establishment Clause is in the mere fact that public schools teach the scientific evidence supporting neo-Darwinian evolution (evolution).4 In the foundational 1968 case Epperson v. Arkansas, not only did the U.S. Supreme Court plainly rule under the presumption that teaching evolution is † Casey Luskin, M.S., J.D., Esq. is Program Officer in Public Policy and Legal Affairs for the Discovery Institute. As an attorney with a graduate science background, he has published in GEOCHEMISTRY, GEOPHYSICS, AND GEOSYSTEMS; PROGRESS IN COMPLEXITY, INFORMATION AND DESIGN; RESEARCH NEWS AND OPPORTUNITIES IN SCIENCE AND THEOLOGY; JOURNAL OF CHURCH AND STATE; MONTANA LAW REVIEW; HAMLINE LAW REVIEW; and THE PRAEGER HANDBOOK OF RELIGION AND EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES (James C.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Origin of Academic Freedom Bills by Means of Precedential Selection: and Why Efforts Should Be Taken to Facilitate Their Extinction Marcus Pierce Almond
    Seton Hall University eRepository @ Seton Hall Law School Student Scholarship Seton Hall Law 2013 On the Origin of Academic Freedom Bills by Means of Precedential Selection: and Why Efforts Should be Taken to Facilitate Their Extinction Marcus Pierce Almond Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.shu.edu/student_scholarship Recommended Citation Almond, Marcus Pierce, "On the Origin of Academic Freedom Bills by Means of Precedential Selection: and Why Efforts Should be Taken to Facilitate Their Extinction" (2013). Law School Student Scholarship. 382. https://scholarship.shu.edu/student_scholarship/382 ON THE ORIGIN OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM BILLS BY MEANS OF PRECEDENTIAL SELECTION: AND WHY EFFORTS SHOULD BE TAKEN TO FACILITATE THEIR EXTINCTION By: Marcus Almond Seton Hall Law Advanced Writing Requirement: Expert Witnesses ·~.~~'->/ Summer, 2011 INTRODUCTION Though courts have uniformly found that legislative efforts to restrict the teaching of the theory of evolution (TE) in public schools violate the Establishment Clause, the tactics of those intent on doing so have consistently adapted to such precedential selection. Most recently, Academic Freedom Bills (AFBs), which permit science teachers to introduce instructional materials that argue against TE, have been proposed in thirteen state legislatures across the United States. Though at present only Louisiana has passed such a bill into law, AFBs are currently pending in Florida, Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas. State legislators should reject further efforts to enact AFBs into law. AFBs, and the organizations that lobby for them, misrepresent the views of the scientific community regarding the viability of TE. They obfuscate professional and legal protections of teachers' rights to academic freedom, and they propagate inaccurate scientific information.
    [Show full text]
  • The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design Free
    FREE THE POLITICALLY INCORRECT GUIDE TO DARWINISM AND INTELLIGENT DESIGN PDF Jonathan Wells | 273 pages | 25 Aug 2006 | Regnery Publishing Inc | 9781596980136 | English | Washington DC, United States The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design | Discovery Institute Store This article is part of a series of critiques of Jonathan Wells' The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design that will be appearing at the Panda's Thumb over the course of the next week or so. Previously, I'd dissected the summary of chapter 3. This is a longer criticism of the whole of the chapter, which is purportedly a critique of evo-devo. Jonathan Wells is a titular developmental biologist, so you'd expect he'd at least get something right in his chapter on development and evolution in The Politically Incorrect Guide to The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design and Intelligent Designbut no: he instead uses his nominal knowledge of a complex field to muddle up the issues and misuse the data to generate a spurious impression of a science that is unaware of basic issues. He ping-pongs back and forth in a remarkably incoherent fashion, but that incoherence is central to his argument: he wants to leave the reader so baffled about the facts of embryology that they'll throw up their hands and decide development is all wrong. Do not be misled. The state of Jonathan Wells' brain is in no way the state of the modern fields of molecular genetics, developmental biology, and evo-devo. Here's my shorter version of Wells' chapter 3, titled "Why you didn't 'evolve' in your mother's womb.
    [Show full text]
  • What's the Matter with Kansas?: the Development and Confirmation of the Evolutionary Attitudes and Literacy Survey (EALS)
    Evo Edu Outreach (2011) 4:117–132 DOI 10.1007/s12052-010-0294-1 EDUCATION ARTICLE What’s the Matter with Kansas?: The Development and Confirmation of the Evolutionary Attitudes and Literacy Survey (EALS) Patricia H. Hawley & Stephen D. Short & Luke A. McCune & Mark R. Osman & Todd D. Little Published online: 3 December 2010 # Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010 Abstract The present survey was designed to assess interest in this university-based sample, the personality factor predominant regional belief systems and the roles these openness to experience appears to be highly relevant for beliefs play in science understanding and attitudes, and several higher order factors (e.g., exposure, knowledge and curricular effectiveness in colleges and universities. To this relevance, and creationist reasoning). We close with implica- end, we created a wide variety of theory-driven subscales tions for educators and the next steps in survey development. (lower order factors) reflecting, for example, exposure to evolutionary material, young earth creationist beliefs, moral Keywords Evolution . Survey . Confirmatory factor and social objections, political ideology, endorsement of analysis . Attitudes . Knowledge intelligent design fallacies, knowledge (and distrust) of the scientific enterprise, and attitudes of evolutionary theory’s relevance in several domains (e.g., sciences and humani- Evolution is a theory. God is the true creator and He ties). We also included potentially important demographic created animals to change w/their environment. variables (e.g., rural upbringing, family size). Finally, we –KS teacher assessed openness to experience, a key facet of personality. Hierarchical Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) analysis Thank you for trying to teach what they’re not in showed the 16 constructs to have a theoretically meaningful Kansas public schools.
    [Show full text]
  • Darwin's Poisoned Tree: Atheistic Advocacy and the Constitutionality
    Darwin’s Poisoned Tree: Atheistic Advocacy and the Constitutionality of Teaching Evolution in Public Schools By Casey Luskin M.S., J.D., ESQ Trinity Law Review Fall, 2015 Volume 21, Issue 1, Pp. 130-233 Published by Trinity Law School lawschool.tiu.edu '$5:,1¶632,621('75(($7+(,67,& $'92&$&<$1'7+(&2167,787,21$/,7<2) 7($&+,1*(92/87,21,138%/,&6&+22/6 &$6(</86.,1 ,QWURGXFWLRQ 7KHWHDFKLQJRIELRORJLFDORULJLQVLQSXEOLFVFKRROVLVDFRQWHQWLRXV DQGKLJKO\GHEDWHGDUHDRIWKHODZ,IWKHUHLVDQ\IL[HGVWDURIWKLVHYROYLQJ OHJDO ILHOG LW LV WKH 86 6XSUHPH &RXUW¶V KROGLQJ LQ Epperson v. ArkansasWKDW³>W@KH)LUVW$PHQGPHQWPDQGDWHVJRYHUQPHQWDOQHXWUDOLW\ EHWZHHQUHOLJLRQDQGUHOLJLRQDQGEHWZHHQUHOLJLRQDQGQRQUHOLJLRQ´ )ROORZLQJWKLVPDQGDWHIRUVWDWHQHXWUDOLW\LQHYROXWLRQHGXFDWLRQ YDULRXVFRXUWVDQGOHJDOVFKRODUVKDYHRSSRVHGWKHWHDFKLQJRIDOWHUQDWLYHV WR HYROXWLRQ E\ FLWLQJ DQ KLVWRULFDO FRQQHFWLRQ EHWZHHQ RSSRVLWLRQ WR HYROXWLRQ DQG WKH DGYRFDF\ RI ³IXQGDPHQWDOLVW´ UHOLJLRQ 2QH DXWKRU FRQWHQGVWKDWDWWHPSWVWRWHDFKQRQHYROXWLRQDU\YLHZSRLQWVRIELRORJLFDO RULJLQV DUHXQFRQVWLWXWLRQDO EHFDXVH VXFK YLHZSRLQWVDUH DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK UHOLJLRQ PDNLQJ WKHP ³>I@UXLW RI WKH SRLVRQ WUHH´ $QRWKHU VFKRODU VLPLODUO\VXJJHVWVWKDWVRPHHGXFDWLRQDOSROLFLHVWKDWVDQFWLRQFULWLTXHRI HYROXWLRQ HQWDLO ³JRYHUQPHQW PHDVXUHVWKDW DULVH IURP D FRQVWLWXWLRQDOO\ SUREOHPDWLFKLVWRU\´DQGDUHWKHUHIRUH³WDLQWHGIUXLWRIWKHSRLVRQRXV WUHH´ .ULVWL / %RZPDQ ZDUQV WKDW XQGHU FXUUHQW ODZ WKH ³UHOLJLRXV $WWRUQH\DW/DZ5HVHDUFK&RRUGLQDWRU'LVFRYHU\,QVWLWXWH6HDWWOH:$%6 8QLYHUVLW\RI&DOLIRUQLD6DQ'LHJR068QLYHUVLW\RI&DOLIRUQLD6DQ'LHJR-' 8QLYHUVLW\RI6DQ'LHJR7KHDXWKRUWKDQNV$QLND6PLWK'DYLG'H:ROI6DUDK&KDIIHH
    [Show full text]
  • Varieties of an Atheist Public in a Digital Age: the Politics of Recognition and the Recognition of Politics
    315 http://jrmdc.com Varieties of an Atheist Public in a Digital Age: The Politics of Recognition and the Recognition of Politics By Jack C. Laughlin University of Sudbury, Canada Contact: [email protected] Keywords: Atheism, Internet, Publics, Counterpublics, Humanism, Secularism Abstract: With the rise of atheism as a cause célèbre in the last decade or more, media and others have offered many interpretations for the apparent growth of nonbelief, ranging from the apocalyptic to the utopian. Many cite the Internet as a major contributing factor to this growth; undoubtedly new media have provided atheism with greater visibility. In this article it is argued that atheism as an Internet phenomenon ought to be understood less as the manifestation of a social fact and more as the discursive constitution of one or more publics in Michael Warner’s sense of the term. To this end, the article draws attention to a body of data that has received limited attention in scholarship to date, namely the blogs of some notable atheists. These are limited to blogs originating in the United States, and especially those by authors who identify as ‘progressive’. Thus, the conclusions drawn are not imagined to apply outside that context, nor are the sources employed considered to be representative of American atheism. But these limitations present no bar to the analysis of the particular discursive practices of the authors in question. Following Warner, virtual atheism as a public or publics has little capacity for agency: even if its growth as a social fact is true, and even as it develops agendas for social change, it is neither discursively or substantively robust enough to challenge any aspect of the contemporary neo-liberal order.
    [Show full text]