Re: [asa] Can God Love Darwin, Too?

My response had nothing to do with ID persecution. I have readily agreed
that ISU was not out of bounds in denying tenure on the basis of a lack of
acquiring external funding. My comment was about the ridiculous claim that
if Gonzalez *had* been awarded tenure that all of ISU would be known as the
ID university.

The point with Mirecki is clear enough: Is UK now known as the university of
buffoons because of Mirecki's childish behavior?

And is ISU to be known as the university where faculty organize petitions
when an unpopular colleague gets close to tenure review, rather than allow
the process to go forward in its usual private and unmolested manner?

You keep saying, as if it matters, that Gonzalez wasn't mentioned by name in
Avalos's petition. *Puh-leeze,* you don't have to be Felinni to figure out
who was in the cross-hairs.

On 9/11/07, PvM <pvm.pandas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 9/11/07, Ted Davis <tdavis@messiah.edu> wrote:
> > >>> PvM <pvm.pandas@gmail.com> 09/11/07 11:35 AM >>>asks the following
> > question, I presume not simply a rhetorical one:
> >
> > What about Baylor with Marks and Dembksi? Does Baylor have the right
> > to protect its good name? Even with Gonzalez, does his 'academic
> > freedom' somehow prevent others from expressing their worries as to
> > how their institutional name is being used for poor science?
> >
> > Note that Gonzalez was not even mentioned in the petition although it
> > was Gonzalez's work that was causing ISU to be seen as an ID school.
> >
> > Ted responds:
> > No one's academic freedom prevents anyone else from disagreeing, even in
> the
> > strongest possible terms, with their conclusions. To offer just one
> nice
> > example, John Brooke, Alister McGrath, and Peter Hodgson all disagree
> > vehemently with the atheistic interpretations of science advanced by
> their
> > Oxford colleagues Peter Atkins and Richard Dawkins. Despite the fact
> that
> > Dawkins has written simply incompetent, not to mention insulting, things
> > about science and religion, none of his colleagues has organized a
> petition
> > drive distancing their university from his work--whether or not he is
> > explicitly named in the petition (which is frankly, Pim, a red herring).
>
> Your 'argument' is a red herring. Why should the fact that McGrath et
> al have not filed a petition have anything to do with the question if
> people can use petitions to object to ID as being a science. Several
> universities have done this and many organizations have done so.
> Gonzalez was not named, although his work was one of the main reasons
> since it allowed the DI and the ID movement to use the name of ISU in
> their promotion of ignorance.
>
>
>
> On 9/11/07, David Heddle <heddle@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Pvm,
> >
> > "Note that Gonzalez was not even mentioned in the petition although it
> > was Gonzalez's work that was causing ISU to be seen as an ID school."
> > I think that's a bunch of crap. Maybe Gonzalez deserved tenure, maybe he
> > didn't, but the fear that he would make ISU known as an ID school is
> > nonsense. It would be like saying that Paul Mirecki has made the
> University
>
> And yet that is the petition that was signed. So perhaps your argument
> lacks in fact?
>
> > of Kansas known as the school where professors post under usernames like
> his
> > (Evil Dr. P.) and make childish comments like he did (talking about a
> nice
> > slap in the big fat face of the fundies.) Fortunately for UK it doesn't
> work
> > that way. One professor does not an institutional reputation make, so
> > Mirecki has not made UK into an institution of jackasses.
>
> I have no idea what you are 'arguing here'
>
> > If one professor behaving badly could affect the reputation of the whole
> > school, then Avalos has now given ISU the reputation of a univeristy
> where
> > it is OK to use the cheapest, most unscholarly, most cowardly strategy
> (a
> > petition) in an attempt to influence, in a very public way, what is
> supposed
> > to occur behind closed doors (tenure review.)
>
> Again you seem to be reaching in your conclusions which do not match
> the facts as we know them. But I understand your anger, Gonzalez made
> for a powerful PR for the DI, too bad that this may have distracted
> him from pursuing a path towards tenure. The fact remains that
> Gonzalez was not awarded tenure for reasonable reasons of failing to
> meet department and university standards.
>
> So back to the example I quoted, why should this be different from all
> these other examples which ID claims as examples of 'persecution'?
> Or, can universities indeed protect their good names as suggested by
> Ted in his original response? Is academic freedom without any limits
> and obligations?
>
>
> >
> >
> > On 9/11/07, PvM <pvm.pandas@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > What about Baylor with Marks and Dembksi? Does Baylor have the right
> > > to protect its good name? Even with Gonzalez, does his 'academic
> > > freedom' somehow prevent others from expressing their worries as to
> > > how their institutional name is being used for poor science?
> > >
> > > Note that Gonzalez was not even mentioned in the petition although it
> > > was Gonzalez's work that was causing ISU to be seen as an ID school.
> > >
> > >
> > > <quote>Avalos helped spearhead a faculty petition urging "all faculty"
> > > at ISU to "uphold the integrity of our university" by "reject[ing]
> > > efforts to portray Intelligent Design as science." Avalos later
> > > conceded to a local newspaper that Gonzalez was the key motive for the
> > > petition.</quote>
> > >
> > > and
> > >
> > > <quote>One of those authors, Hector Avalos, told The Tribune at the
> > > time he was concerned the growing prominence of Gonzalez's work was
> > > beginning to market ISU as an "intelligent design school."</quote>
> > >
> > > What I have found interesting is how academic persecution is so easily
> > > claimed by ID in cases which suit their needs while they seem to
> > > remain quiet on other similar cases.
> > >
> > > On 9/11/07, Ted Davis <tdavis@messiah.edu> wrote:
> > > > The story Pim links is important. The president of Olivet was in a
> > tough
> > > > spot, given the views of certain constituents (no school can survive
> if
> > it
> > > > just ignores its constituents), and I understand his decision in
> that
> > light.
> > > > Our president (not our current president) made a similar call many
> > years
> > > > ago, banning the use of the film, "The Last Temptation of Christ,"
> in
> > > > classes when important questions were raised over how it was being
> used
> > in a
> > > > couple of classes. I supported that decision. Obviously I am not
> close
> > to
> > > > the situation at Olivet, but I disturbed by the decision to remove
> > Colling
> > > > from teaching the general biology course. In the absence of further
> > > > information (I stress that), this seems similar to what happened to
> Dean
> > > > Kenyon, who was also moved out of teaching general biology when he
> > became a
> > > > critic of evolution. It's hard to know how to balance academic
> freedom
> > with
> > > > an institution's commitment to it's own understanding of truth.
> > > >
> > > > Going beyond anything in this story, I do not see much parallel here
> > with
> > > > the petition against Guillermo Gonzalez, who was not teaching ID in
> his
> > > > courses. That one continues to be for me a black & white situation:
> the
> > > > facts continue to suggest to me that Avalos was worried about
> Gonzalez'
> > ties
> > > > to conservative Christians, and sought to discredit him via a
> petition
> > > > directed at Gonzalez' book, not his classroom
> teaching. Incidentally, I
> > > > spoke not long ago with someone who signed that petition entirely
> > without
> > > > having knowledge of the context (I won't say more about that),
> someone
> > who
> > > > is not a theist but who has come to regret signing the petition, b/c
> > this
> > > > person now sees it as an unwarranted attack on Gonzalez' academic
> > freedom.
> > > >
> > > > Ted
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> > > "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
> >
> >
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Sep 12 07:15:17 2007