Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mcnc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!mcnc!bch
From: bch@mcnc.UUCP (Byron Howes)
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: Dark Ages
Message-ID: <2398@mcnc.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 2-Dec-84 13:09:23 EST
Article-I.D.: mcnc.2398
Posted: Sun Dec  2 13:09:23 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 4-Dec-84 06:36:41 EST
References: <729@oliven.UUCP> 
Reply-To: bch@mcnc.UUCP (Byron Howes)
Organization: North Carolina Educational Computing Service
Lines: 61
Summary: 

In article  esk@wucs.UUCP (Eric Kaylor) writes:
 
>Just a historical note here.  At least in my history books, the dark ages
>are referred to as the time from the fall of Rome to the early medeival
>period, i.e. 500-1200.  Far from having 'caused' the dark ages, the church
>was probably one of the few factors that saved much of civilization during
>this time of turmoil.  The inquisition was mostly a factor during the late
>medeival and rennaissance periods.  Although organized religion has been
>responsible for many problems, the dark ages are not one of them.

Agreed, the Roman Church didn't 'cause' the dark ages, the sources of that
long period of human stagnation are too complex to lay on one component of
civilization.  It can, in fact, be said to have 'saved' civilization -- if
by that you mean locked up and threw away the key.  The Church was simply
more interested in spreading Christianity than knowledge.  While much was
maintained in monastary libraries, it was generally inaccessible to any
but certain of the church heirarchy.

If any group can be said to have saved civilization for a time, it is the
Moslems (notably the Abassiaean Caliphs) who maintained and expanded on
Greek philosophy, developed algebra, and built the foundations for what
we now know as science.  Unfortunately, we can also hold the Caliph of
Egypt responsible for the burning of the library at Alexandria, clearly
one of the great losses in history.

Both cases are illustrative of the problem when religious forces take
complete control of the educational system.  Knowledge gets somehow
divided into to categories -- heretical and orthodox.  To paraphrase
the rationale behind the burning of the Alexandrian library, "if it
isn't in the inerrant-book-of-your-choice, it's heretical.  If it is
in the interrant-book-of-your-choice, it's redundant."

One has to be very careful in pointing to creationism as the possible
precursor to a 'new Dark Ages' (which is, I think, what we're talking
about here.)  I've seen little evidence that creationists actually
want to destroy knowledge by burning books (though there is some, which
frightens me.)

The real danger of the creationist goal, the teching of creationism
side-by-side with evolution in the school, is the dilution of discipline
in scientific inquiry.  More than a collection of hypotheses, facts
and relationships, the conduct of science is a way of thinking about
the natural world which requires self-discipline in proceeding from a
set of stated assumptions to a set of tentatively drawn conclusions.
Along the way there are lots of hurdles, pitfalls, shortcuts and
reasonably subtle traps which one needs to become aware of and avoid.

My experience has been that most creationists and many evolutionists
are really unaware of scientific conduct and its implications.  I
attribute this to massive failures already in the educational system
in teaching science as a way of thinking.  Were the conduct of science
well-taught in schools then I would have absolutely no objection to
the teaching of creationist principles.  Unfortunately it is not
and that, more than any notion of competition between science and
religion, theories and non-theories, bodes ill for the development of
civilization.

-- 

						Byron C. Howes
				      ...!{decvax,akgua}!mcnc!ecsvax!bch