Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Professor Rigid on Evolution (must "believe" to get med school rec)
The Lubbock Avalanche Journal ^ | 10/6/02 | Sebastian Kitchen

Posted on 10/06/2002 8:16:21 AM PDT by hispanarepublicana

Professor rigid on evolution </MCC HEAD>

By SEBASTIAN KITCHEN </MCC BYLINE1>

AVALANCHE-JOURNAL </MCC BYLINE2>

On the Net

• Criteria for letters of recommendation: http://www2.tltc.ttu.edu/dini/Personal/ letters.htm

• Michael Dini's Web page:

http://www2.tltc.ttu. edu/dini/

Micah Spradling was OK with learning about evolution in college, but his family drew the line when his belief in the theory became a prerequisite for continuing his education.

Tim Spradling said his son left Texas Tech this semester and enrolled in Lubbock Christian University after en countering the policy of one associate professor in biological sciences.

Professor Michael Dini's Web site states that a student must "truthfully and forthrightly" believe in human evolution to receive a letter of recommendation from him.

"How can someone who does not accept the most important theory in biology expect to properly practice in a field that is so heavily based on biology?" Dini's site reads.

Dini says on the site that it is easy to imagine how physicians who ignore or neglect the "evolutionary origin of humans can make bad clinical decisions."

He declined to speak with The Avalanche-Journal. His response to an e-mail from The A-J said: "This semester, I have 500 students to contend with, and my schedule in no way permits me to participate in such a debate."

A Tech spokeswoman said Chancellor David Smith and other Tech officials also did not want to comment on the story.

At least two Lubbock doctors and a medical ethicist said they have a problem with the criterion, and the ethicist said Dini "could be a real ingrate."

Tim Spradling, who owns The Brace Place, said his son wanted to follow in his footsteps and needed a letter from a biology professor to apply for a program at Southwestern University's medical school.

Spradling is not the only medical professional in Lub bock shocked by Dini's policy. Doctors Patrick Edwards and Gaylon Seay said they learned evolution in college but were never forced to believe it.

"I learned what they taught," Edwards said. "I had to. I wanted to make good grades, but it didn't change my basic beliefs."

Seay said his primary problem is Dini "trying to force someone to pledge allegiance to his way of thinking."

Seay, a Tech graduate who has practiced medicine since 1977, said a large amount of literature exists against the theory.

"He is asking people to compromise their religious be liefs," Seay said. "It is a shame for a professor to use that as a criteria."

Dini's site also states: "So much physical evidence supports" evolution that it can be referred to as fact even if all the details are not known.

"One can deny this evidence only at the risk of calling into question one's understanding of science and of the method of science," Dini states on the Web site.

Edwards said Dini admits in the statement that the details are not all known.

Dini is in a position of authority and "can injure someone's career," and the criteria is the "most prejudice thing I have ever read," Seay said.

"It is appalling," he said.

Both doctors said their beliefs in creationism have never negatively affected their practices, and Seay said he is a more compassionate doctor because of his beliefs.

"I do not believe evolution has anything to do with the ability to make clinical decisions — pro or con," Seay said.

Academic freedom should be extended to students, Edwards said.

"A student may learn about a subject, but that does not mean that everything must be accepted as fact, just because the professor or an incomplete body of evidence says so," Edwards said.

"Skepticism is also a very basic part of scientific study," he said.

The letter of recommendation should not be contingent on Dini's beliefs, Edwards said.

"That would be like Texas Tech telling him he had to be a Christian to teach biology," Edwards said.

Harold Vanderpool, professor in history and philosophy of medicine at the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, said he has a problem with Dini's policy.

"I think this professor could be a real ingrate," Vanderpool said. "I have a problem with a colleague who has enjoyed all the academic freedoms we have, which are extensive, and yet denies that to our students."

Vanderpool, who has served on, advised or chaired committees for the National Institute of Health, the Food and Drug Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services, said the situation would be like a government professor requiring a student to be "sufficiently patriotic" to receive a letter.

"It seems to me that this professor is walking a pretty thin line between the protection of his right to do what he wants to do, his own academic freedom, and a level of discrimination toward a student," he said.

"It is reaching into an area of discrimination. That could be a legal problem. If not, it is a moral problem," Vanderpool said.

Instead of a recommendation resting on character and academic performance, "you've got this ideological litmus test you are using," he said. "To me, that is problematic, if not outright wrong."

William F. May, a medical ethicist who was appointed to President Bush's Council on Bioethics, said he cannot remember establishing a criterion on the question of belief with a student on exams or with letters of recommendation.

"I taught at five institutions and have always felt you should grade papers and offer judgments on the quality of arguments rather than a position on which they arrived."

Professors "enjoy the protection of academic freedom" and Dini "seems to be profoundly ungrateful" for the freedom, Vanderpool said.

He said a teacher cannot be forced to write a letter of recommendation for a student, which he believes is good because the letters are personal and have "to do with the professor's assessment of students' work habits, character, grades, persistence and so on."

A policy such as Dini's needs to be in the written materials and should be stated in front of the class so the student is not surprised by the policy and can drop the class, Vanderpool said.

Dini's site states that an individual who denies the evidence commits malpractice in the method of science because "good scientists would never throw out data that do not conform to their expectations or beliefs."

People throw out information be cause "it seems to contradict his/her cherished beliefs," Dini's site reads. A physician who ignores data cannot remain a physician for long, it states.

Dini's site lists him as an exceptional faculty member at Texas Tech in 1995 and says he was named "Teacher of the Year" in 1998-99 by the Honors College at Texas Tech.

Edwards said he does not see any evidence on Dini's vita that he attended medical school or treated patients.

"Dr. Dini is a nonmedical person trying to impose his ideas on medicine," Edwards said. "There is little in common between teaching biology classes and treating sick people. ... How dare someone who has never treated a sick person purport to impose his feelings about evolution on someone who aspires to treat such people?"

On his Web site, Dini questions how someone who does not believe in the theory of evolution can ask to be recommended into a scientific profession by a professional scientist.

May, who taught at multiple prestigious universities, including Yale, during his 50 years in academia, said he did not want to judge Dini and qualified his statements because he did not know all of the specifics.

He said the doctors may be viewing Dini's policy as a roadblock, but the professor may be warning them in advance of his policy so students are not dismayed later.

"I have never seen it done and am surprised to hear it, but he may find creationist aggressive in the class and does not want to have to cope with that," May said. "He is at least giving people the courtesy of warning them in advance."

The policy seems unusual, May said, but Dini should not be "gang-tackled and punished for his policy."

The criterion may have been viewed as a roadblock for Micah Spradling at Tech, but it opened a door for him at LCU.

Classes at LCU were full, Tim Spradling said, but school officials made room for his son after he showed them Dini's policy.

skitchen@lubbockonline.com 766-8753


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: academia; crevolist; evolution
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 1,261-1,265 next last
To: All
To: f.Christian

Have you heard the story going around about the bio prof in a well-known NorthEast university who is speaking about evolution and notices three guys snickering in the back of the room? "You guys must be fundamentalist Christians" snorts the professor. One of the three replies "No, we're math majors; like, we understand the laws of probability..."



17 posted on 9/27/02 11:07 AM Pacific by piltdownpig


61 posted on 10/06/2002 11:17:10 AM PDT by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry; Doctor Stochastic
If you were a math teacher, would you recommend someone for further math studies if he didn't truly believe that 2+2 = 4?

More to the point, if you were a Mathematics prof, would you want to put up with a Numerology lunatic jumping up to contest everything you put on the blackboard for your students?

If you were an Astronomy professor, would you want Astrologers jumping up to contest everything you present to the class?

If you taught medicine, should you have to tolerate a devotee of Chiropratic jumping up every five minutes to claim that disease is caused by spinal misalignments that cause undetectable energy flowing through the nervous system to be impeded?

If you taught Chemistry, would you want Alchemists jumping up and down during class to pollute your students' minds with their bizarre theories about transmutation of Elements?

62 posted on 10/06/2002 11:19:03 AM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: BMCDA
I like this explanation...

"Though the sentiment is obviously inane, Mr. Trilling's hubris, and that of liberals in general, was perhaps understandable in light of the fact that he wrote at the precise midpoint of the long liberal interregnum that prevailed from the presidency of Herbert Hoover (1928) until the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980. The position of Left intellectuals of that day seems somehow reminiscent of the famed little old lady who told a physics lecturer that all he had said about the heliocentric universe was rubbish because :"


'The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant tortoise.'

"The scientist gave a superior smile before replying,"

'What is the tortoise standing on?'

'You're very clever, young man, very clever,' said the old lady. 'But it's turtles all the way down.'

"Trilling and company, perched on the middle tortoise, assumed it must be tortoises all the way up and down. As Russell Kirk amply demonstrated, they were as wrong as she."

"As Russell Kirk amply demonstrated, they were as wrong as she."

Real funny...

it must be tortoises(evolution/atheism) all the way up and down.

Did you ever study Western Civilization---American History?

Maybe if you did...you wouldn't be so distracted---confused!

63 posted on 10/06/2002 11:20:09 AM PDT by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: bert
To be a competant Pyysician one must first be a scientist. The consideration of Biblical creation myths over scientific evolutionary theories will result in ineffective medical education.

Very few doctors are a scientists, most doctors are "technicians." They do not do medical research or discover new laws of medicine, they apply the laws of medicine. Applied science is technology.

If They Believe That - Science

Today, many things are called science which are not science at all. All studies of origins, for example, and paleontology, for another, are research, and involve a great deal of scientific method, but technically are not science.

Hank

64 posted on 10/06/2002 11:23:05 AM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: All
Running joke is 'evo-science'...

biggest cult of oxy-moonie-morons---art bells!

Latest evo gem--artist...

Sure. All domesticated animal husbandry is proof of evolution but in the case of planned animal husbandry, man, rather than environmental influences, play the role of selectivity. Try to think this through, which, I realize, may not be easy. If you cross a poodle to a poodle, do you get a wolf? (Knock, Knock)

Now: Do you care to give me scientific proof that God exists?

I'm not kidding. You people amaze me.

294 posted on 8/25/02 12:02 PM Pacific by AllSmiles


More...


Like FR 'patrickhenry'...

"search for the creator via evolution"---

"total--only evolution" too---


The papal encyclical rightwingprofessor-whack thinks/interprets---"professes evolution"...

could abortion be next???


Nebullis..."preschool evolution---INTENSIVELY"---


donh..."if the sun can create crystals-snowflakes...human life would certainly follow"---

(Why, if the sun can create crystals and snowflakes, can't it create life?)

(How much different is my paraphase of your rhetorical question---statement!)


also by donh...Hitler and nazi germany were all Christians---creationists!

(With this statement we can safely say bankrobbers/murderers are auditors/morticians!)


dominick harr..."just like a ball bouncing down the stairs----evolution created everything"---

jennyp..."anarchist evolutionary(natural) capitalism---Christianity(manmade) is communism"---

and patrickhenry doesn't know..."if prior to darwin---if science existed"...

SkyRat...Divine hammer-retribution from above via evolution!

exdemmom...evolution is the "lug wrench" that fixes science--biology/life!

Running sores of evo schlock!

Few new ones by the vade--junior--ph evo cult...

More schlock---latests(evo proof/matches/links)...

over---abundance of dung for beetles...schlock providence/miracles

ground depressions on earth surfaces collect liquids producing ponding---more spontaneous schlock opportunities/diversity...

motion/movement is created via biological interference/resistance in gravitational force fields...

foot/toe ground contact---attractions/balance...

standing/walking/running upright

amazing...dancing too!

My own...how evo schlock made us...

Insects vibrate molecules and gas particles---sound...and how humans procreate via words/instruments---music/songs.

I get it!

This schlock is so simple...natural---unplanned---no design!

Presto...mommies/daddies---babies!

Only logic--sense--sanity could schock the evo-schlock world...if it could penetrate it!

One more evo gem by allsmiles...

CLASSIC...

I really don't care who is crazy as long as they are tame. But the religious are not tame. They insist upon imposing their lunatic beliefs upon the rational and the children of the rational. That's where you get yourselves in trouble. If you have any confidence in what you are saying at all, be content to keep it to yourselves, as atheists are.

381 posted on 8/26/02 5:42 AM Pacific by AllSmiles

Yeah...as atheists are?

65 posted on 10/06/2002 11:23:20 AM PDT by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: rdb3
Yes, I believe that a medical education should not be wasted on someone who doesn't give credence to evolution, anymore than it should be wasted on someone who believes in faith healing or sympathetic magic. Such a person would not appreciate the value of medical experiences or experiments involving animals, including those that the evolutionists believe are close relatives of humans. Since creationists do not see any family connection between humans and primates, they would be ill-equipped to understand the applicability of medical breakthroughs and demonstrations involving animals.
66 posted on 10/06/2002 11:27:50 AM PDT by DonQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: DonQ
To: Dimensio

As I see it, evolution is an ideological doctrine. If it were only a "scientific theory", it would have died a natural death 50 - 70 years ago; the evidence against it is too overwhelming and has been all along. The people defending it are doing so because they do not like the alternatives to an atheistic basis for science and do not like the logical implications of abandoning their atheistic paradigm and, in conducting themselves that way, they have achieved a degree of immunity to what most people call logic.

488 posted on 7/29/02 5:18 AM Pacific by medved

Main Entry: log·ic

Pronunciation: 'lä-jik
Function: noun

Etymology: Middle English logik, from Middle French logique, from Latin logica, from Greek logikE, from feminine of logikos of reason, from logos reason -- more at LEGEND

Date: 12th century

1 a

(1) : a science that deals with the principles and criteria of validity of inference and demonstration : the science of the formal principles of reasoning

(2) : a branch or variety of logic

(3) : a branch of semiotic; especially : SYNTACTICS

(4) : the formal principles of a branch of knowledge

b (1) : a particular mode of reasoning viewed as valid or faulty

(2) : RELEVANCE, PROPRIETY

c : interrelation or sequence of facts or events when seen as inevitable or predictable

d : the arrangement of circuit elements (as in a computer) needed for computation; also : the circuits themselves

2 : something that forces a decision apart from or in opposition to reason < the logic of war >

- lo·gi·cian /lO-'ji-sh&n/ noun

67 posted on 10/06/2002 11:28:49 AM PDT by f.Christian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: scripter
Darnit. I have that backwards. I should have looked first! The evo's have taken the blue pill!

That's what you get for spending all your time watching for me to trip up ;)

68 posted on 10/06/2002 11:29:46 AM PDT by general_re
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: hispanarepublicana
Micah Spradling was OK with learning about evolution in college, but his family drew the line when his belief in the theory became a prerequisite for continuing his education.

What nonsense. This Professor Dini is entitled to believe in sillyness as much as this student does. Since when does a recommendation from a particular professor become a prerequisite for continuing an education? My suggestion: find another professor...Texas Tech may have another one or two.

That said, medical school is a little different from science. One can be a fine clinician and believe that the moon is made of cheese. It makes not a bit of difference.

69 posted on 10/06/2002 11:31:26 AM PDT by Nebullis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nebullis
OK, you can be Dr. Micah Spradling's first patient.
70 posted on 10/06/2002 11:40:46 AM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: bert
The consideration of Biblical creation myths over scientific evolutionary theories will result in ineffective medical education.

How, specifically?

71 posted on 10/06/2002 11:42:05 AM PDT by William Terrell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: DJtex
Which creationism? You yap as though there is one belief, and adhere to the erroneous one. Typical of a teency mind.
Evolution is a belief requiring more faith than any religion. Far more people believe the universe was created than in your elitist theory. You're in the minority.
72 posted on 10/06/2002 11:44:05 AM PDT by ALS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
I would go under the knife. Really!!!
73 posted on 10/06/2002 11:45:19 AM PDT by Nebullis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: hispanarepublicana
I'll bet if Dini's rigid position was in defense of Creationism, this wouldn't just be a local story.

Yes, and for good reason. They aren't equivalent. It would likewise be big news if a Geology professor required students to believe in flat earth, but one that required students to believe the earth is round is no news at all.

74 posted on 10/06/2002 11:46:56 AM PDT by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BMCDA; f.Christian
BMCDA: Now come on Vade, you know that facts are wasted on f.Christian.

Do you ever have that right? Point out that his theory has been refuted already, get back his canned spam book reviews.

75 posted on 10/06/2002 11:47:37 AM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Ahban
Where is the commitment to freedom of thought? Why not let the market decide what kind of doctors people want to have?

Of course, in a free market of education the professor has the right to decide who he does and doesn't give a recommendation to. You can't compel him to give a recommendation to a person that he honestly believes is undeserving of a recommendation. That knife cuts both ways.

But in this case nobody is really interfering with the free market, insofar as the professor is not making it impossible for him to become a doctor. The free market punishes people who make bad choices, but it generally doesn't make it impossible to make bad choices.

76 posted on 10/06/2002 12:05:36 PM PDT by tortoise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: general_re
That's what you get for spending all your time watching for me to trip up ;)

Oh that. I was just kidding. Or was I? :-)

77 posted on 10/06/2002 12:06:39 PM PDT by scripter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

KEEP AMERICA FREE

DONATE TODAY
SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC

Donate Here By Secure Server
Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
Become A Monthly Donor
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD

78 posted on 10/06/2002 12:07:09 PM PDT by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Gritty
Evolution is a theory, not a proven fact. It is even referred to in most scientific circles and books as the Theory of Evolution!

Technically, "theory" is also incorrect. Evolutin is a hypothesis, unprovable in a strict scientific sense, because there is no possiblity of a repeatable experiment, and there is no clear way to possibly disprove it. Both of these are criteria for science.

Way too much emphasis these days is put on origins, as though we couldn't be sure we are here unless we can determine absolutely how we got here.

How many here have ever had to use there knowledge of how man got on earth to do their job?

By the way, technically, very few of the things called "science" these days, are science at all:

If They Believe That - Science

Hank

79 posted on 10/06/2002 12:07:49 PM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: hispanarepublicana
Wow. Weird seeing this when I am in a right wing Presbyterian college. The science department has tons of posters and articles.....many that mock evolution. There is no mention of evolution at all in the biology course syllabus. Abortion is clearly attacked as well.
80 posted on 10/06/2002 12:08:59 PM PDT by rwfromkansas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 1,261-1,265 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson