Comfortable in the middle

This is the third post in the What my decade long foray into the creation-evolution debate taught me about the human condition (and how it applies today) series .  This post ended up somewhat longer than I hoped.  Explaining my thoughts on complexity is a bit complex! Science as a way of knowing I loved being able to teach introductory college biology – it was a staple course I taught for 19 years.  I taught it to a lot of students – usually three sections a year, each with 60-118 students.  Lots of enrolled students were not interested in science, and were only there to check-off one of their two required science electives.  Lots of college freshmen came in with a negative impression of science – many did not have good experiences with their high school science classes.  For this reason, I felt it important to convince them from the beginning that the course was worth their while, and presented them with value beyond a checkmark on a list, and nothing...

This is the second post in this series.  Here is a link to the first post (an overview of the series). Integrating faith and learning I really had not given any thought to any potential issues between Christian belief and evolutionary theory until I began my career as a biology professor at a Christian university in North Carolina.  I took the position because I was specifically looking for a way to blend my Christian belief within a profession, and I felt that taking a faculty position at a Christian university was a great way to do this.  There wasn’t a single event which got me interested in the creation-evolution debate - it was a series of events and experiences.  First, I began teaching a basic biology course, which included typical introductory-level coverage of evolutionary theory.  The textbook was a commonly used one at many universities, and it  very briefly acknowledged there was some controversy concerning evolutionary theory.  I had many...

This is the first in a series of posts intended to share insights I learned about how people end up believing the things they do. It feels like a good topic to discuss, given all what happened in 2020, and the information overload we are exposed to and the large number of voices competing for attention, clicks, followers, influence and even power. You might think as you read on, that this is about the creation-evolution debate, but it really isn't. This debate is how I learned what I did, but I have no intent to defend one side or the other, nor persuade readers towards a particular position in this debate. A few recent circumstances got me reminiscing about a period of time in my life when I chased the tireless rabbit of the modern creation-evolution debate.  One was the unfortunate death of a former college student of mine to COVID-19.  It got me thinking of my time as a college professor, and the memories I had of not only this student, but some of my favorite moments as...

I don’t really follow people, because I’m a Christian.  But there are a few people I occasionally go out of my way to learn more about what they are saying.  One such person is Professor of Science and Religion, Denis Lamoureux. I met Denis at a conference of Christian biologists held at Gordon College over 20 years ago, shortly after I started my long and exciting journey down the deep rabbit hole of the creation/evolution debate (an academic hobby I immersed myself in for about a ten years, and one of only a few topics I might be able to claim true expertise in).  I’ve maintained a professional friendship with Denis, and know that he is a genuine and sincere Christian, and among the best thinkers I personally know.  Now, when I say that I look to Denis to learn about his thoughts and ideas on the integration of faith and science, it doesn’t mean that I necessarily accept everything Denis is proposing.  But I do consider him to be a person worth listening to. ...

Recent news made me look up the definition for the word “cure”.  Merriam-Webster offered me four definitions.  I decided to use definitions 2c (a course or period of treatment) and 2a (recovery or relief from a disease) in the composition of this blog title, Hydroxychloroquine is the cure (2c) that doesn’t always cure (2a). However, it looks like a lot of hopeful people took the bait of a r ecent press event by a group of careless doctors who used the word “cure” in asserting there is a cure for COVID-19.  Why do I assert they are careless?  Doctors are educated in a certain way, and should know not to use the word “cure” when it is not warranted, given its popular and common meaning. How do I know it is not a cure (2a definition)?  Peer reviewed articles like this one , published on July 1, 2020 .  If one takes the time to read and understand the results, it is clear that mortality still occurs with hydroxychloroquine treatment (range of 13.5-20.1% mortal...

I’m so glad there are professional cognitive scientists and social psychologists trying to better understand why people behave the way they do.  As a biologist by training, I know that human behavior is influenced by a combination of biochemistry, and by a range of complex environmental factors.  I enjoy learning about little pieces of the puzzle discovered through the hard sciences and the social sciences.  My understanding of human behavior is even more complex, as I’ve decided to entangle natural and supernatural influences on human behavior.  For example, when God prompted me to get up out of my seat in a waiting area at the Pittsburgh airport, and go talk to a particular woman to pray for her, I don’t think it was my biology compelling me to do so (because everyone who knows me well, knows I’m a massive introvert and incredibly socially awkward, and would never do that, of my own accord), and I don’t think it was my natural environment, but I do attribute it to ...