The Mistaken Rejection of Evolution: How Did Mainstream Christian Fundamentalism Come to Misconstrue the Role of the Hypothesis In Science?

Although a complex movement, fundamentalism has once again become commonplace in American Protestant Christianity. Some of its hallmarks include an emphasis upon traditional values, an acceptance of a particular Christian dogma, dispensational premillennialism, and the strident denial of evolution. By dividing time into scripture-based dispensations, fundamentalists reject the magnitude of geologic time that is necessary for the evolutionary history of life. As well, they await the immanent end of time and the start of the millennial reign of Christ on earth. Fundamentalists also adhere to a mistaken notion of the role of the hypothesis in a scientific method. For example, they believe they are justified in rejecting anything less certain than observable fact because it is speculative and therefore merely a guess or a hunch. This belief stems historically, in part, from their interpretation of the writings of Francis Bacon, a key proponent of scientific empiricism for them and also (ironically) for us. Their view was also influenced by Thomas Reid of the Scottish Common Sense philosophical school. Their beliefs about science include: 1, All of nature is governed by laws which are supported through facts (Bacon); 2, The facts of nature can be known directly through common sense (Reid); 3, All that needs to be done to advance scientific understanding is to observe and arrange the facts to show how they support already existing natural laws (a misconstrual of what Bacon wrote). Evolution, they believe, is neither an observable fact nor a law, but merely a speculative hypothesis, so they are free to reject it. Geoscientists will do well to understand these long-standing reasons for rejecting evolution, how scientists work with speculative hypotheses and why we believe they are necessary in any scientific method that more constructive dialogue may ensue.