I believe scenario presented shows how our understanding of the world is shaped a Cartesian perspective. The readings mention that we organize the world into categories to help us understand and make sense of the world. These categories are often polar and dialectical. For example, the professor argues that our understanding of the world's origin can either be based on religion or science but not both. There is no consideration of a "grey" theory that occupies the realms of science and religion. This is the perfect transition to introduce my punny title.
Saturday, February 17, 2018
Fiddy shades of grey
During a lecture, a professor told us about the story of one of his students. The student was applying to pharmacy school and she asked him for a letter of recommendation. The professor agreed to write the letter of recommendation highlighting her qualities as a student, but he refused to acknowledge her as a scientist and therefore did not recommend they admit her to pharmacy school. In an assignment for his class, the student explained that she believed in creationism despite identifying as a scientist. The professor further explained that he could not acknowledge the student as a scientist because he believed that a scientist should hold empirical beliefs. By rejecting a scientific theory over a religious one, the professor did not believe the student could be a capable pharmacist because to him a pharmacist is a scientist and scientists accept all empirical theories. Did the professor make the right decision?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is a great example of a "Cartesian" perspective in a way. The split between science and religion and not having an overlap is very true up to this generation. If one's belief is only true to science then the professor did the right decision. However, that is only to make science firm to what it has been without clouding the judgments of "scientists." If we consider the perspective of the society, then, it is very controversial to say whether the professor was right or wrong with the decision he made. I honestly think that he is wrong based on my own beliefs. I think that science and having a religious aspect in it can have a some sort of overlap that have not yet been explained at all.
ReplyDeleteIMHO (no, really stronger than that): wrong decision and probably an illegal one. But I suspect a common view. Lehigh University's Biology dept. web page has a statement about the total academic freedom they grant to Steve Behe (who invented 'intelligent design.' He's a professor. He can say and believe what he wants. But they don't. Better played.
ReplyDelete