Inherit The Wind Essay, Research Paper

Are You A Man or

A Monkey ?

A Disturbing Movement of

Anti-Intellectualism in America

"It?s more valuable to see with the eye in one?s heart,

rather than see with the eye in one?s head."

The epic crusade of science and technology versus theology, both

religions of sorts dating back in time more years than any of us can begin to

comprehend. Maybe that is why, as a whole, we have such a difficult time

discerning between the two, or rather, why we fail to see clearly the true

meaning that lies behind the propaganda of either.

The arguments on either side are significant and carry as much reason

and weight as the other. Thus, we simply cannot refuse to make a judgment

before looking critically into the logistics surrounding the propaganda of each

theory. God?s diplomats, the Bible-thumping, prophesizing blow-hards much

like Brady in Inherit the Wind, are as much the bigoted and biased,

sacrilegious and amoral attention-seekers as they proclaim the evolutionists to

be. However, their chosen doctrine cannot be overlooked, as I myself am

deeply devoted to it?s teachings. Brady and others like him fight from the

backbone of Faith. I don?t believe in the literal deciphering of the Bible, but

that it is a book of ideals that we must trust in it?s veracity. It isn?t meant to be explained!

Ironically, the thing that people are the most hungry for, meaning, is the one thing that science hasn?t been able to give them. Enter God, the means

that mankind has clung to for purpose. If there isn?t a God, does that mean

that 95% of the world is suffering from some sort of mass dillusion? There

may be a thousand arguments against there being a supreme being that we can

think of, but it?s all those reasons that we cannot think of that allow him to

continue to exist as a necessity in our hearts and minds. True, in the past

Galileo, Copernicus and others have proven that the Church can be wrong –

and I agree. Yet the Church, like humanity, has the right to make a mistake

and reassess their beliefs. It doesn?t mean all they say is false, not at all! I couldn?t imagine living in a world where God didn?t exist — I wouldn?t want

to.

Turn around 360 degrees and you are back facing the same direction,

now science lies in front of you where religion so recently resided. Politics,

science, philosophy, theology, technology — it?s so easy to become confused.

Science is a truth, no matter how adamantly we decree it otherwise. If we

were the center of the universe (as the Bible mandates), if we were all there

was — it?d be an awful waste of space. Think about it, what is more

reasonable; that an all-powerful, mysterious God created the universe and

then decided not to give any proof of his existence, OR, that he simply

doesn?t exist at all and that we created him so that we wouldn?t feel so small

and alone. Proof? What is faith more than a sense of adventure, of risk.

Science strives for reason and truth, hard evidence and fact, and right now we

are merely in a technological adolescence. Brady?s argument portrays

science as being purely practical, even profitable. In as sense, doing away

with all pure research. In Inherit the Wind, Drummond replies sarcastically

to this belief of Brady?s that "It frightens me to imagine the state of learning

in this world if everyone had your driving curiosity." After all, what are we

here for? To watch television, drink Coca-Cola and eat McDonald?s? No! A

ship in the harbor may be safe, but that is not what a ship is built for. We

must pursue our need for knowledge, and if this means going against any

preconceived notions we fostered in accordance to a God, so be it. To go

forward, we must sacrifice.

All in all, despite any persuasive contentions either way, I?ve fostered

my own belief in the matter. That, as a scientist you can believe in God and

as a devout you can entertain evolution. Forget the book of the Lord or the

book of Darwin, in my book they are two totally separate things. No

scientific theory, including evolution, can pose any threat to evolution — for

these two tools of human understanding are parallels, and not opposites, each

in their own separate realms. Science is simply an inquiry into the facts and

nature of the world, while religion is a search for ethics and morals. They

should be equal, mutually respecting partners, each the master of its own

domain, each vital to human existence in its own way. The whole

controversy over evolution is misguided, for science without it is like

chemistry without the periodic table or history without George Washington.

Accepting evolution isn?t rejecting religion. Both can, and should exist in

harmony, and the powers that be should let the individual decide where his

interests may be focused.