Nemesis Juggernaut writes:
I think it would be a safe assumption to presuppose that it wasn't until creationism reared its face on the scene that the laymen really took up arms in understanding their own beliefs about biology.
I may be wrong here, but didn't creationism exist prior to the establishment of evolutionary theory as a part of science? I was under the impression that for a few thousand years human beings had followed the doctrines of one church another, never questioning the veracity of the claims of religious "experts". It was only when evolutionary theory became an established part of science that laypersons really took up arms in understanding their own beliefs about biology. It was only when laypeople rejected the authority of witchdoctors and actually started to question things for themselves that the "controversy" began.
Non-evolutionary theories about the diversification of life on Earth have been the dominant theories for the vast majority of human history. And, to be honest, they haven't achieved much of intellectual credit other than a few nicely-written fairy stories. Evolutionary biology is, by comparison, a young rebellious upstart in the field of enquiry. The fact is that laypeople are very keen to learn about the science of biology and keen to escape from the stultifying non-explanation that has been offered by theology throughout human history.
For creationists to pretend that they are the new kid on the block, fighting against an authoritarian structure of knowledge in the form of "Darwinism", is to read history upside down.
Mick
™ Version 4.2
