Doubting Didymus

My objection is twofold: first, the professor imposes a hard and fast rule where none should exist, and secondly it creates an absolutely abysmal public impression and works toward confirming the carefully nurtured creationist martyrdom syndrome.

It is just no good to impose this rule, where the student must sign a piece of paper saying 'I believe in evolution'. The student could be the best and brightest in the course, yet simply having the bad fortune to be born into a fundamentalist family would rob said student of an opportunity he would otherwise have been a shoo-in for.

Bringing me to another related point. This is Texas we are talking about. With the word out, any person who gets this guys letter of reccomendation is known to all and sundry as an 'evolutionist', which I'm told = 'godless heathen worthy only of scorn' in them thar parts of the world. What if a student does accept evolution, but does not want their family to know? (not an uncommon phenomenon, if my impressions are correct). What will happen when the kid brings home the letter, which everyone knows you need to sign the evil contract to get?

Personally, if I was after a letter of reccomendation from this guy, and was told that I had to sign some statement of belief or other beforehand, I would tell Dr Dini just where I reccomend he can shove it. I don't need some professors personal standard lumped on me as well as my exams and assignments. If he wants to exclude anyone who doesn't understand, or is no good at, evolutionary theory then thats fine with me, but it needs to stay private and evaluated case by case, not decided by the magic signature of consent.

Second: Creationists have been joyously cultivating the public impression that the opressive dominant veiwpoints in the stuffy, closed-minded elite of science are busy excluding any alternative theories on idealogical grounds. How often do you hear laments about 'evolutionists recruiting and indoctrinating our best and brightest'? How about 'Science is dominated by an atheist preisthood, who work to exclude anyone who wishes to point out the elephant in the room'? A third: 'Of course there are no creationist or ID papers published in peer reviewed journals. How could it be otherwise when only the darwinist opinion is permitted'?

Regardless of whether Dini is justified to do what he is doing, it will do nothing if not spark a massive sympathy for these creationist arguments, throwing still more wood on the creationist witch burning fires.


[/RANT]


Edit:
I would prefer that the sole condition that decides a students potential for tertiary education is how good they are at biology. I agree that evolution deniers are not as likely to fully grasp biology as those who know what is going on, but that is by no means a guarantee that said student will definitely be shit at life science. All one needs to refute the good professors standard is a single evoltuion denier who is a valuable asset to the biological sciences. It simply does not follow that Evolution denier = totally unworthy of further education in biology. There should be but one criterion: Talent in the field.

[ October 06, 2002: Message edited by: Doubting Didymus ]</p>

Doubting Didymus

It's a crap thing to do no matter who does it. Letters of reccomendation should only be decided by how good the student is at whatever it is they are doing. Professors should not be going around saying 'you must believe, or no letter for you'. Obviously, if a students failure to grasp the central concepts makes them crap at whatever the course is, fine, no letter. What I have a problem with is the idea that no such thing as an evolution denier with something valuable to contribute to the life sciences is even possible.

pz

You have avoided the central issue here: what right does any student have to demand a letter of recommendation? I say it is perfectly legitimate for a professor of biology to put any conditions he wants on whether he will give a student his personal (and that's what this is about -- a personal decision) vote of confidence.

You can make all the excuses you want that a creationist might be able to make some contribution to biology. It's entirely possible, but it will be in spite of his demonstrable incompetence in the field. Perhaps the professor should be compelled to write a recommendation against his wishes, in which he says, "This student is palpably ignorant of basic principles of biology. However, he might be highly competent at rote learning, and might be able to master the mechanics of medicine. There is even a one in a million chance that he'll get lucky and accomplish something substantial in the field." Or would you only be satisfied if he had to write nothing but superlatives? That would certainly diminish the value of all recommendations from that professor or institution.

Kevin Dorner

OK, no argument here. Need I mention Baby Fae again? Then again, decisions like this are rather rare in medicine.

But this part I don't get:

Why wasn't the application just based on grades? So if you get get excellent grades, but have a personality rift with a prof. and they won't give you a letter of recommendation, your education is over? That makes no sense.

pz

It doesn't. It's just crybaby whining -- he's making excuses.

If he's so smart, I think he should have just made an honest effort to learn some real biology, and avoided dragging his silly superstitions into his education.

Doubting Didymus

I did not realize that this was the central issue. Fine, no student has the right to demand a letter of reccomendation. They DO have the right to demand fair consideration.

The professor could require the students to rub their tummies and pat their heads at the same time, if he wanted to. The issue is whether he should.

What if the student wants to keep his own opinions to himself? What if the student manages a feat of compartmentalisation and keeps his personal opinions out of his professional research? That is something many scientists are required to do anyway.

That is completely irrelevant. As you say, the professor can write whatever reccomendations he chooses. The point is that he is demanding information that he should not require, before he gives his consent. It seems that he can not trust the students prowess in the subject as a decent indicator of worthiness. When confronted with the statement of belief requirement, I would ask the question of the good professor: 'Without knowing my personal opinions, do you think I am good enough at biology to deserve a letter, or not?'. Why can't he make that desicion UNTIL he knows whether I believe it or not? What if I just happen to consider that information a private matter?

Coragyps

Jest a cotton-pickin' minnit here, you...you...antipodean! Who are you sayin' is backwards and ignurnt? Texans? Why, we've got George Dubbya...

Oh shit. Never mind.

RufusAtticus

Doesn't Texas Tech have more than one biology prof? Sounds like the kid is a whiner. If he wants to be a creationist in med school, he can apply to Loma Linda.

I wonder if anyone would care if the student expressed that he didn't believe that germs cause disease. I can see it now:

Professor rigid on the cause of disease

Tommy Totone was OK with learning that germs cause disease in college, but his family drew the line when his belief in the theory became a prerequisite for continuing his education.

Jim Totone said his son left Lubbock State this semester and enrolled in Lubbock College for Jesus after encountering the policy of one associate professor in biological sciences.

Professor James Buffet's Web site states that a student must "truthfully and forth rightly" believe that germs cause disease to receive a letter of recommendation from him.

"How can someone who does not accept the most important theory in medicine expect to properly practice medicine?" Buffet's site reads.

Buffet says on the site that it is easy to imagine how physicians who ignore or neglect the "germs cause disease can make bad clinical decisions." . . .

Jim Totone, 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.

Totone is not the only medical professional in Lubbock shocked by Buffet's policy. Doctors Pat Boone and Marvin Gaye said they learned that germs cause disease in college but were never forced to believe it.

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

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

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

"It is appalling," he said.

Both doctors said their beliefs that demonic possession cause disease have never negatively affected their practices, and Gaye said he is a more compassionate doctor because of his beliefs.

"I do not believe the germs have anything to do with the ability to make clinical decisions — pro or con," Gaye said.

Academic freedom should be extended to students, Boone said.

Buffet'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," Buffet's site reads. A physician who ignores data cannot remain a physician for long, it states.

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

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

"Dr. Buffet is a nonmedical person trying to impose his ideas on medicine," Boone 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 germs causing disease on someone who aspires to treat such people?"

On his Web site, Buffet questions how someone who does not believe that germs cause disease can ask to be recommended into a scientific profession by a professional scientist.

[ October 07, 2002: Message edited by: RufusAtticus ]</p>

pz

Errm, this is a biology student asking a biology professor for a recommendation to continue a career in biology. The professor asks him one question that is eminently relevant and undeniably central to his education in biology.

I do not understand how ANYONE can think this is irrelevant or unfair. I also don't understand how anyone can think the answer to such a question would be private and beyond the scope of an interview prior to giving a letter of recommendation. Can I look forward to students in my cell biology class answering an exam question about the Krebs cycle with "I consider my opinion on this question to be a private matter"?

Coragyps

Rufus - keep your "news release" on file. The Lubbock paper may be needing a copy.

[ October 06, 2002: Message edited by: Coragyps ]</p>