Expelled
I had no idea Ben Stein was making this movie until I read this rave review of the film. Having not seen the movie, I can't say whether or not it's convincing or reactionary or just plain shitty, but based on Bozell's review of the film, it sounds like the kind of film that so heavy handedly skewers the argument toward one side that audiences are inevitably split into love/hate camps. And certainly Stein wouldn't be the first documentarian to provide viewers with anything but the whole truth (a certain large, liberal filmmaker comes to mind).
My problem, then, is with Bozell's blanket condemnation of what he terms "PC Liberals" and the "intolerance of academia." He suggests:
I think a balanced film about the issue of Creationism vs. Darwinism is a great idea. However, what I fear is that such a film would demonize, as Bozell's review evidences, those who champion scientific inquiry as not unimpeachable truth, but an intellectually rigorous method for understanding the world around us. Bozell's statement seems to suggest that advocates of Creationism are being hunted down and persecuted like heretics during the Spanish Inquisition while Darwinists sit pretty in their academic ivory towers, gloriously fueling the ignorance machine. This image of the poor, beleaguered Creationist battling the academic Goliath of Darwinism places the debate into a cultural fantasy of biblical proportions.
American popular culture, if we had to try and describe it for say, alien visitors, would in many ways seem "atheism-friendly." Nobody in the entertainment machine would profit much from launching a reality television show called Salvation Island about 12 beautiful women each vying to win the affections of God. Popular culture doesn't really deal with God. Nor does it deal terribly much with Atheism. In fact, popular culture doesn't much care whether you believe in God or Atheism, unless it can translate either of those affinities into a profitable consumer base.
Creationism is hardly the underdog in contemporary American culture. Almost 80% of Americans identify as Christian, while a whopping 14% or so identify as atheist or having "no religion." This to me suggests that Creationism's battle is not to combat the so-called powerful academicians whose scientific reasoning threatens to dismantle the belief systems of unsuspecting citizens. Rather, Creationism's battle is one of basic public relations. By reframing the debate in terms of how the evil PC Liberals are trying to destroy belief in God, Creationism further defers the necessity of coming up with proof that God exists.
As for Bozell's other critiques, I don't doubt that Stein's interviews with various scientists and academics produced easy sound bytes that would highlight their "arrogance." Get anybody riled up long enough about their life's work and they're bound to produce something delightfully arrogant. But I would hardly use this as steadfast proof of "choking" academic intolerance. What Creationism wants us to forget is that science is NOT religion. At the heart of science is the premise that everything remains theoretical unless proven otherwise.
If at the end of Expelled, Stein manages to get God to make an appearance, I will gladly consider Creationism as a viable explanation for how we got here, as I'm sure even the most staunchly arrogant believer in evolution would. Until then, I'd rather set aside this manufactured debate and concentrate on the more important work of trying to understand what (provable) processes led to the blooming of organic life on earth.
My problem, then, is with Bozell's blanket condemnation of what he terms "PC Liberals" and the "intolerance of academia." He suggests:
Everyone should take the opportunity to see "Expelled" — if nothing else, as a bracing antidote to the atheism-friendly culture of PC liberalism. But it's far more than that. It's a spotlight on the arrogance of this movement and its leaders, a spotlight on the choking intolerance of academia, and a spotlight on the ignorance of so many who say so much, yet know so very little.
I think a balanced film about the issue of Creationism vs. Darwinism is a great idea. However, what I fear is that such a film would demonize, as Bozell's review evidences, those who champion scientific inquiry as not unimpeachable truth, but an intellectually rigorous method for understanding the world around us. Bozell's statement seems to suggest that advocates of Creationism are being hunted down and persecuted like heretics during the Spanish Inquisition while Darwinists sit pretty in their academic ivory towers, gloriously fueling the ignorance machine. This image of the poor, beleaguered Creationist battling the academic Goliath of Darwinism places the debate into a cultural fantasy of biblical proportions.
American popular culture, if we had to try and describe it for say, alien visitors, would in many ways seem "atheism-friendly." Nobody in the entertainment machine would profit much from launching a reality television show called Salvation Island about 12 beautiful women each vying to win the affections of God. Popular culture doesn't really deal with God. Nor does it deal terribly much with Atheism. In fact, popular culture doesn't much care whether you believe in God or Atheism, unless it can translate either of those affinities into a profitable consumer base.
Creationism is hardly the underdog in contemporary American culture. Almost 80% of Americans identify as Christian, while a whopping 14% or so identify as atheist or having "no religion." This to me suggests that Creationism's battle is not to combat the so-called powerful academicians whose scientific reasoning threatens to dismantle the belief systems of unsuspecting citizens. Rather, Creationism's battle is one of basic public relations. By reframing the debate in terms of how the evil PC Liberals are trying to destroy belief in God, Creationism further defers the necessity of coming up with proof that God exists.
As for Bozell's other critiques, I don't doubt that Stein's interviews with various scientists and academics produced easy sound bytes that would highlight their "arrogance." Get anybody riled up long enough about their life's work and they're bound to produce something delightfully arrogant. But I would hardly use this as steadfast proof of "choking" academic intolerance. What Creationism wants us to forget is that science is NOT religion. At the heart of science is the premise that everything remains theoretical unless proven otherwise.
If at the end of Expelled, Stein manages to get God to make an appearance, I will gladly consider Creationism as a viable explanation for how we got here, as I'm sure even the most staunchly arrogant believer in evolution would. Until then, I'd rather set aside this manufactured debate and concentrate on the more important work of trying to understand what (provable) processes led to the blooming of organic life on earth.
Labels: atheism, ben stein, brent bozell, creationism, darwinism, expelled, film, religion
1 Comments:
...and on that note, I recommend a book I am currently reading called "The 5th Miracle: The Search for the Origin and Meaning of Life" by dude goes by the name of Paul Davies.
Post a Comment
<< Home