When you come across the terms "Darwinism" or "Darwinists", take heed. ... When evolution is described as a "blind, random, undirected process", be warned. While genetic mutations may be random, natural selection is not.
by Amanda Gefter
Excerpted from New Scientist Magazine (online edition)
Magazine issue 2697, Feb. 28, 2009.
AS A book reviews editor at New Scientist, I often come across so-called science books which after a few pages reveal themselves to be harbouring ulterior motives. I have learned to recognise clues that the author is pushing a religious agenda. ...
Red flag number one: the term "scientific materialism". "Materialism" is most often used in contrast to something else - something non-material, or supernatural. ...
The invocation of Cartesian dualism - where the brain and mind are viewed as two distinct entities, one material and the other immaterial - is also a red flag. And if an author describes the mind, or any biological system for that matter, as "irreducibly complex", let the alarm bells ring.
Misguided interpretations of quantum physics are a classic hallmark of pseudoscience, usually of the New Age variety, but some religious groups are now appealing to aspects of quantum weirdness to account for free will. Beware: this is nonsense.
When you come across the terms "Darwinism" or "Darwinists", take heed. True scientists rarely use these terms, and instead opt for "evolution" and "biologists", respectively. When evolution is described as a "blind, random, undirected process", be warned. While genetic mutations may be random, natural selection is not. ...
If an author wishes for 'academic freedom', it is usually code for 'the acceptance of creationism.'
Amanda Gefter is an editor for the Opinion section of New Scientist
Read the full article here.