ORIGINS OF LIFE
Evolution vs. creation misses the real point
"Genesis of a Social Divide" (July 22) and "The Evolution of a Creationist" (Aug. 1) argued "biblical" vs. "scientific" views of the origins and age of the universe and of life. To some that remains a vital discussion. As one of the writers said, "There are very smart people on both sides of the issue."
But to others, this debate seems ever more misguided and tiresome.
Surely the science-bible question is proxy for another: whether our lives and history and the universe itself are set in a framework of morality and meaning -- or not. Does such a framework even exist? If so, how can we explore its nature?
Good science and good Bible study -- good philosophy and good religion of all sorts -- have much to contribute to that exploration. But arguments about whether there really was a great flood and how long ago the dinosaurs lived contribute almost nothing.
Would that op-ed writers would help us get on with the real discussion.
ANTHONY MORLEY, MINNEAPOLIS
• • •
In "The Evolution of a Creationist," Dr. Ross S. Olson rattles off several creationist hobbyhorses, none of which have any support in peer-reviewed scientific literature. As the late Christopher Hitchens said, that which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.