A Case of Sustained Internal Contradiction: Unresolved Ambivalence between Evolution and Creationism

Many people feel the pull of both creationism and evolution as explanations for the origin of species, despite the direct contradiction. Some respond by endorsing theistic evolution, integrating the scientific and religious explanations by positing that God initiated or guided the process of evoluti...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of cognition and culture
Authors: Metz, S. Emlen (Author) ; Weisberg, Deena Skolnick (Author) ; Weisberg, Michael 1976- (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Brill [2020]
In: Journal of cognition and culture
Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains:B Theory of evolution / Creationism
RelBib Classification:AB Philosophy of religion; criticism of religion; atheism
VA Philosophy
ZA Social sciences
Further subjects:B Epistemology
B Opinion
B Explanation
B Religion
B Science
B Evolution
Online Access: Volltext (Verlag)
Volltext (doi)
Description
Summary:Many people feel the pull of both creationism and evolution as explanations for the origin of species, despite the direct contradiction. Some respond by endorsing theistic evolution, integrating the scientific and religious explanations by positing that God initiated or guided the process of evolution. Others, however, simultaneously endorse both evolution and creationism despite the contradiction. Here, we illustrate this puzzling phenomenon with interviews with a diverse sample. This qualitative data reveals several approaches to coping with simultaneous inconsistent explanations. For example, some people seem to manage this contradiction by separating out ideological claims, which prioritize identity expression, from fact claims, which prioritize truth. Fitting with this interpretation, ambivalent individuals tended to call explanations “beliefs” (not knowledge), avoid mention of truth or falsity, and ground one or both beliefs in identity and personal history. We conclude with a brief discussion of the affordances of this distinction.
ISSN:1568-5373
Contains:Enthalten in: Journal of cognition and culture
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1163/15685373-12340088