jrtom

NY Times: Finding Design in Nature

(I believe that the author, Schönborn, is one of those who had been considered as a possible successor to John Paul II.)

Basically, this is the author's attempt to (as he sees it) set the record straight on this subject, in the light of JP2's 1996 assertion that evolution was "more than just a hypothesis". I find this article distressingly intellectually dishonest and manipulative in several ways.

Zeroth: I'm annoyed that Schönborn chose to bring this up after JP2 was no longer around to clarify his own position. The timing seems awfully convenient in that respect.

First, he says that we should disregard this statement by JP2 because his real teachings had been promulgated 11 years previously. (Because, you know, the Pope can't change his mind.)

Second, the term "neo-Darwinism"--which I'd personally never seen before, ever--is clearly being used to make the theory of evolution as it is currently constituted sound like some untested new-wave theory. *cough*"bullshit"*cough*--that is to say, "this is an underhanded rhetorical device that has no place in a serious discussion".

Third, and overall most disturbing, however, is the claim that the existence of a Deity (always presumed to be the one the Catholic Church approves of, of course) is a necessary conclusion to a rational investigation--and that any theory that does not come to this conclusion is "an abdication of human intelligence". (Among other things, does this not remove the necessity for faith?)

I continue to be stunned by, on the one hand, the Catholic Church's support of scholarship and learning, and on the other, its use of rhetoric and pseudo-logic to support its desired conclusions. *sigh*