On Mon, 5 Feb 96 13:15:42 MST you wrote:
SJ>...and theists like Dean Kenyon removed from his
>post when he dares to suggest that this apparent design is real?
JF>He did not lose his post, he was only suspended from teaching an
>introductory biology course for non-majors
I realised Kenyon did not lose his job, but he did lose his "post",
ie. his teaching post. That's what I meant.
JF>because he had been teaching
>bogus young-earth arguments, and also arguing against abortion.
What evidence do you have for that? I understood that the substantive
charge against Kenyon was that he taught ID:
"That it may be difficult to justify continuing to exclude theistic
opinions from the regular classroom was illustrated by a case that did
not go to court but was settled in the academic government of San
Francisco State University. Dean Kenyon is a distinguished senior
biology professor at that institution and coauthor of a standard work
on the origin of life on earth, Biochemical Predestination. Although
his book reflected the orthodox naturalism of the contemporary
scientific community, Kenyon eventually became disenchanted with
efforts to explain life as a product of purposeless and unguided
chemical evolution. He became a proponent of "intelligent design" as
an explanation for life's inherent complexity, which is to say he
argued, without necessarily endorsing a literal reading of the Genesis
account, that a preexisting supernatural intelligence probably had to
have been involved in some way.
When Kenyon taught the prevailing naturalistic theories of biological
and chemical evolution in his large introductory biology course for
nonmajors, he also explained his own skepticism about whether these
theories are consistent with the evidence and argued that intelligent
design is a legitimate alternative to naturalistic Evolution. A
handful of students complained, and the department chairman
immediately endorsed their complaints. He announced that he would not
allow Kenyon to teach this course in the future, on the ground that
the professor was improperly introducing his "religious opinions" into
the science curriculum."
(Johnson P.E., "Reason in the Balance", InterVarsity Press:
Downers Grove Ill., 1995, pp29-30)
JF> In my
>opinion the suspension was justified; if I was a student paying good
>money for tuition, I'd be decidedly unhappy if I got that in lectures.
I suspect students get a lot of pro-abortion and extra evolutionist
material in classes. Indeed, I would have thought the other side to
the
abortion issue, might be highly relevant in a Biology class?
But even if Kenyon did give the case for YEC (I understand he is not
personally a YEC) and anti-abortion, is that a good reason to deprive
a senior Professor of his teaching post?
JF>I don't consider it an academic freedom issue. No-one has said he
can't
>research or write as he likes. The issue is about what can reasonably
>taught as introductory biology.
By "reasonably" this excludes ID! :-) I rest my case.
JF>The suspension was later overturned, BTW.
Yes. Fortunately there is still a principle of academic freedom:
"Kenyon complained to the faculty senate's Academic Freedom
Committee, arguing that he was merely exercising the right of a
professor to question orthodox opinion in the subject of his
exppertise, which is exactly what academic freedom exists to
protect. The committee agreed with Kenyon, despite vigorous
arguments from the department chairman and the dean of the
School of Science that intelligent design is inherently in the
category of religion and not science. When the faculty senate voted
overwhelmingly to support the committee, the administrators
backed down and reluctantly reinstated Kenyon in his course, at
least for the time being.
The outcome turned on how one categorized what Professor
Kenyon was doing. Academic freedom does not permit a professor
to neglect a subject he is assigned to teach and present a different
subject instead. It does, however, permit him to express a
dissenting opinion about the assigned subject, even if it is an
opinion that his colleagues and the academic administrators regard
as irrational. Like the Dobson film series, Kenyon's advocacy of
intelligent design was an opinion about a subject already being
discussed in the secular public forum, not the introduction of a new
and different subject."
(Johnson P.E., "Reason in the Balance", InterVarsity Press:
Downers Grove Ill., 1995, pp29-30)
BTW, Dean Kenyon used to be a Reflectorite. I have his email address.
Would you agree for me to forward your assertion:
"He (Kenyon) did not lose his post, he was only suspended from
teaching an introductory biology course for non-majors because he had
been teaching bogus young-earth arguments, and also arguing against
abortion. In my opinion the suspension was justified; if I was a
student paying good money for tuition, I'd be decidedly unhappy if I
got that in lectures."
to him for comment?
Regards.
Stephen
----------------------------------------------------------------
| Stephen Jones ,--_|\ sjones@iinet.net.au |
| 3 Hawker Ave / Oz \ http://www.iinet.net.au/~sjones/ |
| Warwick 6024 ->*_,--\_/ phone +61 9 448 7439. (These are |
| Perth, Australia v my opinions, not my employer's) |
----------------------------------------------------------------