According to a brief article in my local paper this A.M. a biology professor at Texas Tech, Michael Dini, is being sued for religious discrimination by a student and the "Liberty Legal Institute".
Professor Dini flatly refuses to give letters of recommendation for higher education to students who reject the Theory of Evolution on religious grounds. Creationists in other words.
Does Professor Dini have a point? Can a person accept the scientific method only to the point where it conflicts with his or her religious beliefs and still be considered a scientist? Prof Dini asks "How can someone who does not accept the most important theory in biology expect to properly practice in a field (Medicine) that is so heavily based on biology?"
Since only some Christians reject the Theory of Evolution, does the refusal to sign a letter of recommendation really constitute 'religious discrimination'? Does the equation Creationist = Bonehead signal opposition to Christianity?
I actually couldn't find any mention of this lawsuit on the 'net, but if one is interested, googling 'Michael Dini' will get sites that argue both sides of the issue.
Posts: 1933 | Location: Boise, Idaho, USA | Registered: 06-03-02
quote:Does Professor Dini have a point? Can a person accept the scientific method only to the point where it conflicts with his or her religious beliefs and still be considered a scientist?
Yes and no. The point in his favor is that if a person flouts scientific tradition and practice in general, then that person clearly isn't part of the scientific community. What else does "scientist" mean other than a person who is part of a community that follows scientific traditions and practices?
On the other hand, scientists throughout history have "bucked the system". Both Newton and Einstein were motivated to change physics in part because their religious sensibilites told them that things must be different from the way they have been traditionally conceived. What made Newton and Einstein scientists is the fact that they employed scientific practices (e.g., propose the new model, test it against experience, modify the model, retest, etc.). They didn't mumble mantras or pray for divine revelation into the nature of the universe or some such.
quote:Since only some Christians reject the Theory of Evolution, does the refusal to sign a letter of recommendation really constitute 'religious discrimination'?
I can't see how. Nobody deserves a professor's recommendation unless the the professor believes the student will make a good scientist. However I question whether believing (as opposed to understanding thoroughly) evolutionary theories is essential to doing science or being a good scientist.
quote:Does the equation Creationist = Bonehead signal opposition to Christianity?
Usually. But not necessarily. It's not a matter of logic, but the two often go hand in hand. Many people reject Christianity in part because they think that to adopt Christianity entails adopting asinine and uninformed views about what science is and does. In any case, it's not clear to me that this particular professor is religiously discriminating (in the negative sense of 'prejudicial'). It sounds to me like he's trying to be scientifically discriminating (in the positive sense of discerning who will make a good scientist).
First of all, the criteria for receiving a recommendation was set forth and available or consideration to all who took Dini's classes. Forewarned is forearmed.
Secondly, it is not Dini who established that a religious belief be grounds for denial. Spradling (the complainant) choose to use his religious beliefs as grounds for rejecting evolution. Had he asserted some other basis, Dini would still not have granted a recommendation. Dini is saying: here is what I have taught you, should you choose not to believe it on grounds other than those that validate this class (the scientific method and facts that have been established through its use) then you have failed to profit by my instruction, and are therefore not worthy of a recommendation, which would imply that you have profited. The crux (or maybe just one of the more salient points) is that Spradling is rejecting the very basis of his chosen field--observation, hypothesis, deduction, and conclusion---in favor of faith. Spradling is saying in effect, "The scientific method cannot provide the answer to life's diversity, only my religion can."
Spradling obviously knew going into biology that it is a field NOT based on religious faith, but scientific enquery. To then reject findings grounded in the very basis of the course because of religious convictions is to deny the validity of the whole field. ************************************************* 02-01-03, 02:17 AM tsaeb I think that under the civil rights laws, religion has to be only one factor violated, resulting in one's being treated differently to one's detriment. The religion violation here seems to be against Christians but not those of any other religion, a situation which is actionable in a court. I suspect that although the professor is trying to stand on his ideological feat, I mean, feet, he is not including in his observations the world framework in which exist civil rights laws. Finally, ideologically, it is possible to be a scientist and a creationist, relative to different aspects of what one is observing/discussing.
Was it former President Clinton who said that one does not have to leave one's religiosity at the schoolhouse door?
[This message was edited by tsaeb on 02-01-03 at 02:26 AM.]
02-01-03, 08:30 AM Mike121 Tsaeb,
I see your point, but I will be surprised if Spradling is successful in making a case. Letters of recommendation by university staff are by tradition a gratuity of sorts issued by professors based on their personal opinions of a student. Professors are not required to write a single letter unless they feel one is merited, and Minn’s points hit home in this regard. These letters are very much like a recommendation from a former employer. Your former employers are required to state nothing more about you than the fact that they employed you. If they state something about you that is untrue and harm your chances for a future job, you have case. But they are not required to shout your praises no matter how well you feel you performed for them.
Professors issue letters of recommendation at their personal discretion and they have every right to be discriminating in deciding who they recommend and why. I agree with Minn. Spradling shot himself in the foot by voicing his personal beliefs in the classroom. As I’m sure Juan will attest, politics pervade the halls of academia. Ignore that fact at your peril.
02-01-03, 08:59 AM juanruiz Mike beat me to this one, as I was going to make the same point: professors are under no obligation to write letters of recommendation; a point many students appear blithely unaware of. As for the politics alluded to by Mike: Oy vey! We have to inform students at the beginning of a course of any possible "objectionable material." Thus when our Classics professor taught a course on Catullus, she had to make sure the students knew in advance that his poetry was rather explicit as far as love was concerned.
02-01-03, 11:02 AM DvdGStwrt If the professor is teaching a class that requires a working understanding of the theories that matter, then it is the students responsibility to learn those theories and have a working understanding of them.
The student is not required to accept and believe the theories, they are only suppose to know them.
If the creationist is unable/unwilling to learn evolution when it is required, then it is the professor's duty to fail the student. Or in this case, not write a letter of recommendation.
I believe that a student must remain a student and not question authority (Professors, Administration, etc) until they have reached their degree(s) then they can question, debate, and even refute that knowledge with the added authority that study affords them.
Saying 'I do not believe this to be true' is one thing, saying 'I do not believe this to be true because of my religion.' says another thing - it says you are not willing to even entertain the possibility.
I think a policy of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' needs be applied in this case. The Creationist should refrain from stating their opinion (unless asked) and shouldn't offer their stance freely. (same thing applies to evolutionist in Sunday School Big Grin)
I disagreed on many points with my professors and teachers through the years, but I always remained open to the possibilities. After studying, and after graduation, I made up my mind and stick to it. Though that may be like concrete, throughly mixed and firmly set. Wink
David
02-02-03, 02:52 AM tsaeb Mike121 & juanruiz: I was outlining what I think would allow a complaint to be filed in a court under the civil rights laws. You gents are getting into the issues of the case, and yes, the solutions to the issues swing the outcome of a case as much as its evidence and testimony. Truly, professors have the choice, not the mandate, to write letters of recommendation. Yet, I think that it was the professor who opened the can of worms by mentioning religion as his reason for not writing. So does his freedom of speech override his dig against Christianity? Great issue.
02-02-03, 03:35 AM babthrower To try to get some perspective on this question, imagine instead that the student was in physics, and flatly refused to accept the theory of planetary motion, as proposed by Newton, on the grounds that Genesis does not support it. Should the student be recommended for advancement in the field of physics?
02-02-03, 11:11 AM Minnesota tsaeb
Just a reminder here, Dini did NOT mention religion as a reason for denying a recommendation. He said "If you cannot truthfully and forthrightly affirm a scientific answer to this question, then you should not seek my recommendation for admittance to further education in the biomedical sciences." Spradling chose to use his religious beliefs as reason for his inability to affirm a scientific answer. And, freedom of speech has absolutely nothing to do with the issue--no more so than complaining that a wrong answer on an essay question was unfairly graded and therefore an infringement of free speech. In applying for a recommendation, Spradling knew that his religious convictions would be reason enough for denial. If he didn't, his lack of awareness would also seem to be grounds for questioning his fitness for recommendation.
02-02-03, 12:41 PM EBknowsBUBBA The professor did his job by teaching the material. The student did his job by learning the material that was presented. By not basing his religious beliefs on the material presented in the classroom should be none of the professor's concern. It is not for the professor to decide what the student believes in. As long as the student took in the material that was required, it is NONE of the professor's business whether the student believe's it.
02-02-03, 02:10 PM Minnesota EB
"By not basing his religious beliefs on the material presented in the classroom should be none of the professor's concern."
I don't know if you misspoke here or not, but Dini did not require that Spradling base his religious beliefs on the material. I am sure that Dini couldn't care less what Spradling bases his religious beliefs on.
"As long as the student took in the material that was required, it is NONE of the professor's business whether the student believe's it."
Right. Unless that student shows a lack of acceptance of the material presented and wants the teacher to overlook that fact. If you taught a class in the Christian concept of god, and I, after passing the course, informed you that I rejected the entire notion of any kind of god, how apt would you be to recommend me for the priesthood or a pastorship? Particularly after I had been informed that one of the requirements for recommendation would be an acknowledgment of god? Recommendations are statements that express confidence that a person has satisfactorily applied themselves and will use what he has learned to the best of his ability. Spradling has, in effect said, "No, I will not even consider what I have learned as beneficial. In fact, I even deny that it has value at all, and instead will rely on my personal beliefs. You are wrong, professor Dini. I am right. Give me my recommendation. And, YES, I did read the requirement for recommendation, but I don't want to abide by it. Give me my recommendation"
02-02-03, 03:29 PM babthrower We assume the student did register in biology with full knowledge of what biology is - a science.
Suppose he had registered instead in a school of theology. Later, he decided he wanted to become a missionary in the employment of the Baptist church. (I know this is an impossible scenario, but bear with me.)
Then he demands a letter of reference from the Dean of the school of theology which he had attended.
"But your thesis was that god does not exist, and we might as well spend our lives in riotous living," the dean responds. "I can't recommend you to teach the word of god to unsuspecting pagans!"
"I'm going to sue you," the student replies, "you are discriminating on religious grounds!"
For each discipline there are pre-requisite assumptions. Anyone who rejects them cannot expect the same recognition and acceptance by his peers as is due to those who accept them.
02-03-03, 02:04 AM tsaeb Minn.: I think that you misunderstood me. Whoever brings a civil rights action has the burden of proving his/her claim. The student would have to show that the professor could not rely on the professor's freedom of speech to the extent of taking a stand against the student's religious views. Bear in mind also that speech can take the form of an action. In short, I was trying to say that the professor's language violated the student's practice of religion outside the classroom. This is a tad too much, although I also agree that the professor had the freedom to not recommend. Therefore, I think that all would have been fine had the professor kept quiet.
02-03-03, 02:14 AM tsaeb babthrower: I think that the student in your example would have no case. Since the court does not intervene in church hirings, I feel that the court would bend over backwards to come up with some nonsense to also not intervene in the disagreement taking place in your hypothetical example in another theological scenario.
02-03-03, 12:49 PM Elexina
quote:Originally posted by EBknowsBUBBA: As long as the student took in the material that was required, it is NONE of the professor's business whether the student believe's it.
You are absolutely right in this respect. What a person believes has absolutely nothing to do with his ability to practice medicine or operate in the field of science. He must, however, have an understanding of the basis of that field and, in this case, that required an understanding of evolution. The professor is not discriminating based on religious beliefs, he is merely affirming that in order to get a letter of recommendation from him, you must provide a scientific answer to the question of how the human species originated. A student who says "god made us" is not being scientific and therefore does not deserve a letter of recommendation. These letters are also voluntary and there is no reason any professor has to write one he does not feel he should write. In a New York Times article, Mr. Spradling states that he sat in on two class sessions, but that there was '"no way" he would have enrolled in Dr. Dini's class or asked him for a recommendation.' So I really don't understand why he's making such a big deal about it.
I do think the professor has an excellent point. If you don't understand the basics of science and biology, you have no business trying to get into medical school. What you actually believe however, is not the issue.
02-03-03, 02:46 PM babthrower Yes, Elexina. If the student is a theist he/she believes that the entire universe was created by god, not just living things, and it is his right yo do so. It will not affect his/her ability one way or the other.
Suppose the student was in medicine and also believed in faith healing. Suppose one question asked (on an oral) was 'Patient shows you a lump on the back of his neck. How would you proceed?"
They would expect the student to describe the steps he/she would take to determine what the lump is, and then, after diagnosis, what steps would he/she take to treat the lump.
If the student replied
"I would pray with the patient for healing."
"Anything else?"
"No. Prayer is sufficient,"
he/she would fail the exam.
This is not religious discrimination on the school's part. This is a refusal on the student's part to understand the underlying requirements of a specific discipline.
Footnote: If the medical student in the example included prayer along with the usual medical treatments, there would be no problem, because the student is recognizing the underlying requirements of medicine.
02-04-03, 05:57 AM Elexina
quote:Originally posted by babthrower: ...If the student replied, "I would pray with the patient for healing."
Exactly. That's what I think, too.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: DorianGreyed,
