Yeah, I know, it hurts to see them mentioned in the same sentence.
But IDologue West has offered an article over at the DI’s Wails and
Moans site (http://www.evolutionnews.org/2008/07/
thomas_jefferson_intelligent_d.html) suggesting that Thomas Jefferson
would have been sympathetic to today’s notion of “Intelligent
Design,” and, importantly, not on the basis of religion. Showing at
least some minimal recognition of reality beyond the ineptitude of his
fundamentalist brethren (e.g. David Barton) who continue to insist
that the founding fathers were Christians, West accepts that Jefferson
was not a Christian in the sense most would have it. But he still
tries to turn Jefferson to his purposes, hoping to kill two birds with
this stone of a blog entry - the first being to buttress the notion
that ID is not a religious proposition, and the second an attempt to
blunt the citation of Jefferson as a rationalist by ID critics.
West attempts to show that Jefferson believed in “Intelligent Design”
through use of the following quote (from a letter to John Adams);
“On the contrary I hold (without appeal to revelation) that when we
take a view of the Universe, in it's parts general or particular, it
is impossible for the human mind not to perceive (sic) and feel a
conviction of design, consummate skill, and indefinite power in every
atom of it's composition. The movements of the heavenly bodies, so
exactly held in their course by the balance of centrifugal and
centripetal forces, the structure of our earth itself, with it's
distribution of lands, waters and atmosphere, animal and vegetable
bodies, examined in all their minutest particles, insects mere atoms
of life, yet as perfectly organised as man or mammoth, the mineral
substances, their generation and uses, it is impossible, I say, for
the human mind not to believe that there is, in all this, design,
cause and effect, up to an ultimate cause, a fabricator of all things
from matter and motion, their preserver and regulator while permitted
to exist in their present forms, and their regenerator into new and
other forms.”
An examination of the quote in context (http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/P/
tj3/writings/brf/jefl271.htm) seems, to me at least, to confirm the
intent. In other words, I don’t believe Jefferson’s perspective (at
that point in history) has been ill-used with this quote. But I do
think West has taken liberties (surprise, surprise) in his
interpretation and extrapolation from Jefferson’s words.
As with the incessant, vapid references to Darwin’s “racism,”
historical context is important. Great men, and I would consider both
Darwin and Jefferson deserving of that adjective, are still flawed
men. And even historically important thinkers, those who question
assumptions and push boundaries, must inevitably be limited by their
fragile and relatively brief lives. Therefore I think a reasonable
approach to assessing an important individual like Jefferson’s
reaction to ID would be to evaluate it through a contemporary lens.
Let’s consider first that Thomas Jefferson also said this:
“On the other hand shake off all the fears & servile prejudices under
which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her
seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion.”
In that light, we can wonder whether, if Jefferson was familiar with
the current controversy over ID, he would, as West says, not only
believe “in intelligent design, he [would insist] it was based on the
plain evidence of nature, not religion.”
West places great emphasis upon the words “without appeal to
revelation.” It seems to me that even in Jefferson’s time this might
not have been meant to counterpose religion with science as much as
personal revelation with a more mundane faith in an impersonal god. We
know he was essentially a Deist, so it should not be surprising that
he sees in the workings of nature the evidence of such a causal agent.
This is much closer to theistic evolutionism than IDism. As such it
would seem likely, given his feelings about a “wall of separation”
between religion and the state, that Jefferson would, if aware of the
current debate, consider ID an affront to the law as well as science.
It also seems unlikely he would have any difficulty (in view of his
apt description of a skeptical mindset above) recognizing and
denouncing the bald religious motives behind today’s “Intelligent
Design” (which is manifestly not Deism).
If Jefferson were alive today, would he willfully ignore the current
research regarding human pattern seeking behavior and its applications
to the interpretation of design in nature? Would he have the self-
discipline to examine his own perspective and wonder whether
appearance of design (even if granted) necessitates an inference to a
transcendent designer? Seems to me a man who said this:
“Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because, if there
be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of
blindfolded fear.”
…would have no trouble adopting such an analytical attitude.
Even in 1787 Jefferson’s version of intelligent design was different
from West’s dressed up creationism. I would submit that, were
Jefferson able to address the debate as we currently understand it, he
would quickly perceive the half-truths and anti-scientific methods
that ID offers as respectable “theory,” and identify the enemies of
rationalism who advocate its imposition by way of politics. West would
surely receive severe reproval for his disingenuousness on behalf of a
poorly disguised religious movement.
“It is in our lives and not our words that our religion must be read.”
– Thomas Jefferson
RLC
