RAPID RESPONSE REPORT
DEFENDING HISTORIC CHRISTIANITY IN A POSTMODERN WORLD
EDITOR: Bill Crouse
POLITICALLY CORRECT SCIENCE: i.e., JUNK SCIENCE
The appellation "junk science" is relatively new to our collective vocabulary. Almost on a daily basis we are subjected to new science breakthroughs only to find out later the report is disputed by other scientists. One day we hear eating eggs is bad for our health only to hear the exact opposite days later. Global warming is going to cause much of the world's landmass to be inundated with water. Some food (usually what tastes good) or chemical causes cancer. We hear almost as many cures for cancer as we hear of causes. What's happening? If we can't trust science who can we trust? It's a question many are now asking, and within the scientific disciplines there is much consternation. Everyone knows about the negative reputation of the law profession, but now scientists! Yes, it appears scientists are now joining the ranks of politicians, and lawyers as people not trustworthy. The late Carl Sagan, tele-evangelist, and high priest of naturalism, was very concerned about what he saw happening, so much so that one of his last books: The Demon-Haunted World: Science As A Candle In The Dark, was dedicated to alarming us about this anti-scientific trend. Sagan was a holdout for the old paradigm of Modernism which had an undying faith that salvation would come through rationalism and science. PM, of course rejects that possibility. For the PM, truth is a social construct, and old modernistic science is viewed with much hostility and seen as an oppressive force. In fact, science is seen not so much as a quest for truth about the natural world, but as means to bring about social change.
Here at the CIM office we collect at least 6-10 examples a week of either junk science or science which is ideologically driven. About 10 years ago we were alerted to scientific conclusions which were forced by radical feminism or the homosexual movement. These were purported to be scientific studies, but with one problem: the facts were taken out of the thin air! Current examples abound. Have you heard of evolutionary psychology? You probably didn't know that gossip was genetically based. Read about it at Fox News
http://www.foxnews.com/health/genes/genes/index.8sml Earlier in the year, two scientists claimed that rape was simply a form of male reproductive behavior. For a few days it was debated all over the web. ( See the article from the Boston Herald
http://www.bostonherald.com/bostonherald/nat/rape01122000.htm Recently, Peter Jennings did a documentary on Jesus. Many of the scholars quoted were also part of the Jesus Seminar, a group, which it seems deliberately set out to deconstruct the NT. This group decided which statements in the NT were true by a majority vote!
There is probably not much that scares us more than the
proverbial mad scientist. It should, and we'd better be on our
guard. A revolution has taken place in the philosophy of science.
Remember, the scientists in the lab are not impervious to what is taking place
in the culture. They too, went to PM schools; they watch
If you are interested in keeping up with dubious scientific claims there is even a website. Go to: http://www.junkscience.com
Here are a few thought provoking articles on the influence of PM in science:
"Partisanship and Special Interests can Leave
Public Wondering What Science is Real."
This is a short article from the
This article is a book review by Jon F. Fielder of a book entitled: Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science. The review appeared in First Things, but you can download it at the website of Leadership University ( a great website)
"What's Happening to the Philosophy of Science?" by Ariel A. Roth. The article is from the Journal, Origins. Here is a quote from the article: "Science is now perceived more as an activity with sociological dimensions. The focus is more on the factors that determine the origin and formulation of scientific questions than on the answers to these questions..." Here's the rest of the article: www.grisda.org./reports/or17_03.htm
"Are Truth Claims in Science Socially constructed?" by Kenell J. Touryan. Unfortunately, this article is not available at the website of the American Scientific Affiliation. Here is the reference: Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, vol. 51, Num. 2, June 1999, pp. 102-107. This article is probably for the more serious reader.
Christian morality is based on an Uncreated Being who is
wholly transcendent. He created man to be a moral being like
Himself. Since He is the Creator, all meaning and truth is based on
His essence or nature. The Creator, because He is the Creator, makes the
rules for His creatures. These rules are based on who He
is. Moral absolutes therefore, exist and extend to the whole created
realm. Right and wrong can be known because this infinite God has
revealed Himself in His Word and in His Son. For the PM there is no
infinite personal transcendent deity as just described, so there are
no moral imperatives that can be applied universally to all mankind.
There is no one correct worldview; there is only diversity. For the
PM there may be many gods, but all are finite and the result of ancient myths
which arose out of a social group. Ethical right and wrong for a PM arises
out of the mores of a group, and what may be right in one group may be
considered wrong by another. One group may condone cannibalism, but for
another, it may be taboo. Ethics is never a personal matter.
For the PM even the person is a group construct. Personal morality is of
little consequence; what is important is group morality, in other words,
being politically correct on the issues. We all are aware that President
Clinton declared that his administration would be the most ethical in
history. For absolutists like your editor, that statement doesn't make
much sense in the light of the last 8 years. However, to a PM
he may have no problem reconciling the president's statement and what
transpired in the Oval Office. Why? Because the President
took the right position on the issues and the economy was good. At some
What drives the fear that most Americans have of
evangelical Christians? They are afraid that Christians, if they gain
ascendancy (get elected to national office) will impose their morality on
them. Remember the fear and the commotion caused in the primaries last
spring when Republican candidate, George Bush, visited
As we noted in an earlier issue, the PM loves nonverbal
communication. What communicates is the visual and the symbolic.
Several years ago at the Oscar Awards ceremony, every one in attendance at the
great hall wore an aids ribbon on their lapel. No
Some bright reader may be thinking: "But aren't words just symbols." Yes, words are symbols, and PM are inconsistent at this point. To really understand this negativity about words one has to understand a little about PM literary criticism. To introduce you to this subject, may I recommend CIM's briefing paper #52, "Deconstructionism: The Post Modern Cult of Hermes." www.fni.com/cim/briefing/decon.html
In the next issue we hope to be a little more positive and offer some strategies for reaching our PM world for Christ.
If this is your first issue and you are interested in reading previous issues they are now up on our website at http://www.fni.com/cim/rapid.html
If you have been added to this list and do not wish for RRR to be clogging you mail box, simply send us a one word message ("unsubscribe") at email@example.com