Rafi Aamar's comments were very
thought-provoking and this is my inferior response to his
comment about my question whether Evolution should be taught as
unchallengeable truth.
Darwin himself referred to his
discovery only as a theory of evolution and my point was that if
it is taught in schools it should be taught as part of Social
Science, not Natural Science which presupposes that it is a
fact. Or perhaps even as part of 19th century Intellectual
history, or Philosophy but not in a class for Natural Science.
Rafi ends his instructive comments
with praise for Richard Dawkins, who like Thomas Huxley in the
19th Century is a Darwin apologist. It is a truism that we tend
to like the authors and books that reflect our own thinking and
while Dawkins and Huxley are both readable that does not make
them right. Phillip Johnson, who is on the other side of the
spectrum, says "Science is not decided by vote but by evidence.
It is not a matter of belief, rather it is a matter of evidence
that can be subjected to the tests of observation."
On a personal side, I must admit
that we were not "taught" Darwin's theory of evolution in
the schools and college that I attended in Lahore. But that
does not mean that our interest was not piqued by this
revolutionary theory. It was often the topic of discussion and
subject of reading while we were growing up in Pakistan. Since
then and particular now, I have read more about Darwin and also
have some authors that I prefer to others; and I quote just two:
Richard Milner says "Evolution is
part of a divine plan, guided by occasional spiritual and
supernatural intervention".
Brian Farrington says, "The
Darwinian account of biological evolution is not a complete
account of reality; but a partial account of one aspect of the
biological process. The whole realm of truth is not covered by
the theory of natural evolution."
I am grateful for this opportunity
of responding to Rafi. At least one person read my speech.
Don Joshua