It’s understandable that some religious conservatives are upset with the new religion course at the University of Kansas subtitled “Intelligent Design, Creationisms and other Religious Mythologies.” The term “mythologies” makes it sound as if believing in God as creator is akin to believing in Zeus or the giant turtle god. But as KU provost David Shulenburger explained in a Lawrence Journal-World article, “mythology” is an academic term referring to the common use of stories or rituals, and doesn’t necessarily mean that a story is untrue.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- DavidB on Open thread 11/22
- DavidB on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
42 Comments
This is just another example of the problems of having academic terms overlap with lay terms. Mythology, theory….the academic world should make up new words so people don’t get so confused.
Or people perhaps need to learn to put the words in their proper context. Hey, isn’t that the idea of getting education?
I believe in God, and if my God does have a mythical reputation, who am I to complain?
Every god is a myth, unless it is your god, then you think it is the truth and everybody else is wrong.
That belief alone has caused so many hardaches around the world.
Tara
The academic world is too confused to do much of anything.
Maybe a good start would be to finally settle the argument about which way is up.
In titling his course Special Topics in Religion: Intelligent Design, Creationisms and other Religious Mythologies, Paul Mirecki couldn’t have come up with a more accurate title or a more intriguing course. I am really rather surprised that the KU School of Religion would allow a course that might open the minds of its students to such alternative possibilities. More power to them!
As a 5th–grader, I read stories of the Greek and Roman Gods and Goddesses of mythology from books in our public school library. I had observed how myths were still being perpetuated in the form of the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, & Santa Claus. It became apparent to me, that “God” was just the Super-God that had been invented as a one-upmanship in the world of gods – an all-empowered god whose presence put all of the lowlier and less empowered gods to shame, and essentially out of the people’s admiration.
In the 40 years since, I have witnessed no reason to believe otherwise. I live by the golden rule and consider that to be doing as good as most people of religious faith. I have just as hard a time understanding why people have such faiths as they do in trying to figure out why I don’t. It is an issue that will not likely be resolved within our lifetimes, so we should just accept it as such and not argue about it.
Please don’t now call for the purging of Mythology books from public school libraries. And please don’t call me an Atheist. I detest the Christian connotation behind that term. If I have to be so labeled, I prefer the term Non-Theist. (And, yes, I put money under my child’s pillows and candy out in baskets and even attend church a couple times a year with the wife and kids ;)
But it’s obvious now that the purpose of this course isn’t academic inquiry. It is to “slap fundamentalists in their big, fat face.” That’s not really the purpose of a taxpayer funded university.
Sedblo, because the purpose of a university is to simply echo what the taxpayers already believe?
The whole agrument grows tiresome. Do you suppose this had anything to do with the original intent of the founding fathers to seperate church and state? It’s a discussion that’s never resolved, and we spend too much time on a subject that has no solution.
sedblo, you’re way too sensitive. Sometimes a college course is just a college course.
Falcone–agreed. The conservatives act like everything in the university is “liberal” and students lap it up like spring milk.
News flash– 1. a lot of students don’t pay attention to what goes on in class and 2. the ones who do often disagree with opinions the instructor espouses.
In the last 7 presidential election cycles, only 2 were won by the more liberal candidate (not counting when Gore WON in 2000).
If this is “liberal indoctrination,” why is it so ineffective?
KU can teach whatever it wants (as long as it’s not Christian). I can send my kids to whatever University I choose…. it was going to be KU… now it will be somewhere else. My kids do not want to attend there anymore!
“In the last 7 presidential election cycles, only 2 were won by the more liberal candidate (not counting when Gore WON in 2000).”
Gore did not win. Get over it!
Kansassam, I’m sure KU will mourn when they find out that your kids won’t be attending. If a class subtitled “Intelligent Design, Creationisms and other Religious Mythologies” is such an affront, why aren’t you already offended by KU’s sexuality classes? Isn’t KU where they have the sex class that got Susan Wagle’s panties in such a bunch? If your kids are offended by the content of a specific class, wouldn’t the obvious solution be to not take the class? I’ll bet KU won’t force them to. The thing about Universities…they’re just chock full of liberal attitudes. Maybe a college education isn’t right for your kids. But on the other hand, one might consider Jones University, or the Air Force Academy. I hear they’re pretty religious.
Philip, this incident should alarm all Kansas taxpayers, not only social conservatives. Your lack of objectivity and fully explaining the situation are confusing the issue.Mr. Mirecki, the creator of the class and Adrain Melott, a Unitarian Minister and Physicist were founders of KCFS (Kansas Citizens for Science). The course at KU is simply an implementation of the Liz Craig strategy (“My strategy at this point is the same as it was in 1999; notify the national and local media about what’s going on and portray them in the harshest light possible, as political opportunists, evangelical activists, ignoramuses, breakers of rule, unprincipled bullies, etc.”. ) Liz Craig is the secretary and media specialist for Kansas Citizens for Science.There is an article that Melott published in an atheist magazine in 2000 where he brags about the strategy used to kick a __. It explains how they developed the idea of raising concerns about business leaving the state and students not being able to compete and get into college. It is apparent that you and the Wichita Eagle are fully assisting with this stategy.The following details the true intent of spending Kansas taxpayer money for the KU class and the content of the E-mail he sent.************Mirecki e-mail :
Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2005
Subject: I.D. & Creationism class to be taught at KU this spring!
To my fellow damned,
Its true, the fundies have been wanting to get I.D. and creationism into the Kansas public schools, so I thought “why don’t I do it?”
I will teach the class, with several other lefty KU professors in the sciences and humanities. Class is:
REL 602 Special Topics in Religion: Intelligent Design, Creationisms and other Religious Mythologies.
Tuesdays 7:00-9:30pm. Smith Hall room 100. Open to undergrads and grads.
Enrollment limited to about 120. 3 credit hours.
The fundies want it all taught in a science class, but this will be a nice slap in their big fat face by teaching it as a religious studies class under the category “mythology”. I expect it will draw much media attention. The university public relations office will have a press release on it in a few weeks, I also have contacts at several regional newspapers.
Of course, I won’t actually be teaching I.D. and creationisms, but rather I’ll be teaching ABOUT I.D. and creationisms as modern mythologies, indicating that these ideas have no place in a public school science class, but can certainly be analyzed in humanities classes for their function in society. Basic approach is my usual: anthropology with a focus on religious thought and behavior.
Any ideas for textbooks, guest lecturers and panels would be appreciated.
So far, six faculty have eagerly signed up to lecture. I can probably pull Chancellor Hemenway into this also, especially in the light of his public comments supporting evolution.
Doing my part to piss of (sic) the religious right,
Evil Dr. P.
Falcone..It is no surprise that KU and most other public universities are liberal cesspools of immorality. But most do not blatantly support such obvious anti-Christian dogma. No.. they won’t miss my kids… we are not a part of a major denomination.. but when the Southern Baptist Convention and other large Christian denominations decide to boycott, it will hurt their pocketbooks!
By the way.. my kids are not seeking a “religious” education, and they don’t have good Pharmacology and Mechanical Engineering programs at the schools you mentioned.If you are insinuating that being a Christian means you can’t be intelligent.. well, just don’t go there!
Can we say, “Damned if you do and damned if you don’t”. We want I.D. taught, KU puts a course in, we don’t like it because they are not taking it seriously!
When in fact their is nothing to put on paper to be taken seriously.”I don’t understand it, I don’t understand God, there for it must have been God that did it”.I am sorry, I meant, “I don’t understand it, so it must have been someone that designed it”.I.D. is not about God or so they say!
Kansassam,I’m a practicing Christian myself. Just a different flavor. I’m not an evangelical or a fundamentalist. My religion and politics, like the majority of Americans, is closer to the middle and like most Americans, I’m tired of the rantings of the far fringes on both sides. Yes, that includes the fanatic religious right. As I said, if you don’t like the class, don’t take it.
Sam, have you ever wondered why centers of intelligence and learning (Universities) are so liberal?
So, if what you say is true.. then why do you not agree that this class is just a ranting of the Evil Dr. P. of the far left. It is an attack on Christians pure and simple.. and it should not be allowed any more than teaching Creation in public school.
Universities are centers of liberalism because they have allowed knowledge to become their god.
Who says I don’t agree? I don’t see it as an attack on ALL Christians, just the fanatical version. I don’t agree with the content of the class, so I won’t take it.
What are you so afraid of? Do you fear that your kids will lose their “indoctrination”?
“Universities are centers of liberalism because they have allowed knowledge to become their god.”
That’s as extreme as it is untrue.
Steve–if you’re going to lie, you really should lie much better than you do.
1. If this is a real e-mail from the head of a department at a major university, how did you get it?
2. This is clearly a FAKED e-mail from an academic. “Lefties” don’t call themselves lefty. It has implications of communism. I know this because I am what you would call a “lefty,” and I would never use this term to describe myself nor would anyone who is sympathic to my positions.
3. This is not a real e-mail because no dept. head would ever send around something with so many typos. Among the freshman composition errors are the following–an exclamation point after the subject line (exclamation points should only follow an exclamation, e.g., Wow! what a idiot!), a comma instead of a dash or a colon after the salutation, an omitted apostrophe in “it’s,” an unnecessary comma before the prepositional phrase starting with “with,” improper use of a colon after the verb “is” (a colon can only follow an independent clause), 600 level courses are not usually open to “undergraduates,” a serious agreement error in “THEIR big fat FACE” (should be “faces”), a blatant comma splice between the sentence ending in “weeks” and the next one starting with “I,” use of the non-word “creationisms,” misuse of the word “indicating,” an unnecessary comma before the simple conjunction (in this case, not a coordinating conjunction) “but,” another agreement error “their function” (should be “their functions”), use of “eagerly agreed to lecture” which is awkward as hell and how does one “sign up to lecture” exactly? (guest lecturers don’t sign anything), unidiomatic use of “in the light of” (should be “in light of”), mistaking “of” for “off” in the last line.
This was not written by a Ph.D. at major university. If it were (note the correct use of the subjunctive mood, found so rarely these days), he should be fired for multiple violations of grammar rules.
Lastly, Steve, the chair of the department of religion is not going to approach the study of religion with “my usual: anthropology with a focus on religious thought and behavior.”
That would be like a physics professor saying that she was going to use her usual approach–”chemistry with a focus on Newton’s laws.”
Looks like we got another “swift boat” e-mail.
But don’t listen to the Associated Press or the New York Times, that snake-oil e-mail is the TRUTH!
Galahad,Does one open one’s self to grammatical criticism by criticizing the grammar of another? This could turn out to be fun!
Besides that, it reaks of “fake”.
I’m not the other one, by the way. The link below takes one to a Lawrence Journal World article that reports the above email is real. Sorry, Galahad, et al.
http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2005/nov/24/ku_evo_email/?evolution
Below is a quote from the LJWorld article. Apparently someone stole the email which was private. I don’t understand how that could happen, but this is a reminder that email is not all that private.
From the article:
Mirecki said he wrote the message in a private e-mail and that an outsider had accessed the listserv.
“They had been reading my e-mails all along,” he said. “Where are the ethics in that, I ask.”
This Mirecki guy obvioulsy got caught with his pants down. My involvement with professional Listservs is that it is usually required that you provide some justification why you should be on it. Someone apparently found a way around that moderation.
But, I think the bigger story here is that if one is bold enough to take on creationists, you better be careful because they are going to be looking for ways to “Smite Thee”.
J.M.–I was attacking the professor’s grammar, not the post-er’s. I make a lot of errors on this board simply because I write fast, not because I don’t know better, and I assume that’s the case with just about everybody else here as well.
*****
Well, if this is for real, then I stand corrected on that.
But I stand by my original posts–this e-mail is unprofessional in the extreme, both in content and usage.
Every academic knows that the purpose of a good education is teaching the PROCESS of determining truth, to the extent truth can be determined.
The tone of this individual’s e-mail strongly implies he’s more interested in scoring points and indoctrinating his students than educating them. That’s bad whether it’s done by the right or the left.
I’ve lost all respect for this inDUHvidual. He shouldn’t offer courses to “slap people in their big fat faces.” That’s not the purpose of education, and he should know that.
Galahad,The question was rhetorical, bro.
I do agree with you: “He shouldn’t offer courses to “slap people in their big fat faces.” That’s not the purpose of education, and he should know that.”
It also isn’t about indoctration, it’s about education. Something many colleges have forgotten.
We all write things in e-mail at one time or other we wouldn’t want published. But I must admit, this was a doozy!
“Indoctrination”…. you have no clue about me or my kids Falcone.. Christianity in the true sense of the label has NOTHING to do with indoctrination. You cannot indoctrinate someone to be Christlike. Religion is another story.. you can indoctrinate rules and rituals…. but not a relationship with Christ.
This professor should step down from this course. He shouldn’t be teaching it. He’s lost all credibility as to his motivations for offering it.
kansassam,
“Universities are centers of liberalism because they have allowed knowledge to become their god.”
Quite an indictment of our college system as a whole, don’t you think? While in some cases that may indeed be true, there are many universities in this great land of ours that hold the student to a much finer dogma than what you seem to grant them.
If indeed your scenario were the norm, I hate to think of the consequences . Why the graduate student might ask too many questions regarding the invasion of another country. They might be inclined to question our leaders, find out just how false they really are, and elect serious, qualified, and morally sound leaders in their place.
I think the college system has its share of problems, but not to the extent you think. And as to the blog’s question? It makes perfect sense. Creationism, intelligent design, et al, have their place in religious education, but not under the name of science. That label should be reserved for beliefs that can be proven by fact. Anything else IS mythology.
A question, Kansassam.How old is the Earth?
Falcone..How in the world would I know? I wasn’t there when God created it.
Sigh, Ok sam, you want to play games…..Let me restate.Do you believe the planet is over 10,000 years old?
Falcone..
“In the beginning God created the heavens and earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.”
Now.. I believe in the 6 days of creation…. but if you read above, the earth could have existed for 10,000 or 10 billion years before the first day. I don’t know why most people ignore that verse.. I can reconcile my beliefs either way. All that really matters is God is timeless and He did it… not some cosmic explosion.
You are the one playing games and asking leading questions.. please don’t question or ridicule my beliefs.. they are mine.. and what I believe is not harming anyone else.
I stand on my original thought.. this professor is attacking Christians, and it is not right that it is allowed to happen in a public forum. People are just too quick to lash out at each other when they disagree, and I think that is really what happened with this Prof. Hopefully cooler heads will prevail.
No sam, I’m not asking leading questions, just trying to figure out who I’m dealing with. There’s nothing wrong with that. You need to calm down. You’re way too cranky.
“I don’t know why most people ignore that verse.. I can reconcile my beliefs either way.”
Excellent answer.
Kansasman
That is written in prose poetry. You don’t need to justify it, or analyze it, just enjoy something very beautiful. And try to understand the moment of being more understanding { which doesn’t just single-out you, but includes all of us }.
Falcone…sorry.. I’ve had the flu since Friday.. I probably am a little cranky! But I’m not mad at anyone (except maybe Evil Dr. P.).
No problem sam. We’re all in this together.
“Mythologies are important,” he (Mirecki) said. “but they do not address scientific solutions, but rather impressionistic solutions to help people address their place in the universe.”
The implication is quite clear: ID is not “scientific” but “impressionistic” – as though Darwinian theory is not. This is simply another way to marginalize a legitimate counter to Darwin’s “science”, ad nauseam.
How about this: “Darwin, Derrida, and Other Mythologies”? I wonder if the folks at KU would take a shine to that one…