The Decretals of Scientism

In a recent Stand to Reason post (Chronicle of Higher Education: Stop Accrediting Christian Colleges), a notice was given about the need to rethink allowing Christian colleges the opportunity of accreditation.  The rationale for this was the trend of such colleges requiring statements of faith that would compromise academic freedom.  The article stated: Consider those Christian colleges that require their faculty members to sign a "faith statement," consenting to such scientifically preposterous propositions as, for example, that God created Adam and Eve, who were real historical figures and who are the actual ancestors of all humanity. I am stunned at the usage of of the phrase "scientifically preposterous propositions."  Science is highly compartmentalized, but it fails to have a study of historical events (history is a maverick branch of human inquiry).  What could be pure imaginary history is the contrived system of evidence that assembles the geologic time table, but science would never allow this assessment.  Pity, but this is the huge obstacle that only academic freedom could hope to resolve, yet never may.

The article boasts:  Skeptical and unfettered inquiry is the hallmark of American teaching and research. However, such inquiry cannot flourish—in many cases, cannot even survive—inside institutions that erect religious tests for truth. The contradiction is obvious.  Agreed.  But will skeptical and unfettered inquiry allow for the critical discussion of the problems of evolution, the extension of micro evolution (easily demonstrable) to macro evolution (indemonstrable, with only contrived evidence).  The university must be universal in its quest, and science must only be a portion in the quest.  Scientism holds that only science is a sure method of gaining knowledge.  But this cannot maintain itself in a college setting.  Christian colleges will teach the tenets of evolution, but question them for their weaknesses.  This is part of skeptical and unfettered inquiry, a mode not current in public institutions of education.

Scientism is inadequate.  It offers the knowledge, but scoffs at the wisdom, only offering a pledge of solutions to manifold problems.  Yet, in the burst of enthusiasm for science I have witnessed in the passing decades two sorry trends.  First, the enthusiasm leads to a frenzy of advancement that borders on the genre of science fiction.  Super science, resulting in improved forms of humanity.  This leads us to visions no better than the mutant world of X-Men or the improved bionics of Lab Rats.  Fictionalized visions of an idealized human race, leading to progressive change that is guaranteed betterment.  But will we be allowed to use that skeptical and unfettered inquiry to question the directions of progessivism, especially if our conscience holds such progression does not advance mankind, but masks is denigration?

That is the second trend, a sensation that scientism rides a crest of optimism to ever glorious goals.  Such optimism needs scrutiny.  It is ever the foible that moments of advancement are ever sustained.  Liberté. L'égalité. Fraternité. Guillotine. Règne de la Terreur.

Horrors if should such unfettered inquiry becomes unbridled, unprincipled demonstrations of human hubris.

Chronicle of Higher Education: Stop Accrediting Christian Colleges - See more at: http://str.typepad.com/weblog/2014/08/chronicle-of-higher-education-stop-accrediting-christian-colleges.html#sthash.ceLb8azY.dpufCh

Chronicle of Higher Education: Stop Accrediting Christian Colleges - See more at: http://str.typepad.com/weblog/2014/08/chronicle-of-higher-education-stop-accrediting-christian-colleges.html#sthash.ceLb8azY.dpuf