News
Garber Announces Advisory Committee for Harvard Law School Dean Search
News
First Harvard Prize Book in Kosovo Established by Harvard Alumni
News
Ryan Murdock ’25 Remembered as Dedicated Advocate and Caring Friend
News
Harvard Faculty Appeal Temporary Suspensions From Widener Library
News
Man Who Managed Clients for High-End Cambridge Brothel Network Pleads Guilty
To the editors:
The problem with the argument to simply ignore Intelligent Design as put forth by Jonathan H. Esensten ’04 is that it assumes that a powerful scientific group (the pro-Darwinian establishment) must be right simply because they agree with each other and ignore their opponents as best they can (Column, “Death to Intelligent Design,” March 31).
Human history shows that insular priesthoods, religious, secular and scientific form again and again to keep outsiders out and keep insiders privileged. This may or may not be the case with Stephen Jay Gould and company. The only way to tell is to honestly and fairly look at the evidence. Science prospers in political systems where the free flow of information and ideas is allowed. Don’t let The Crimson become part of the problem due to a naive view of human history and human nature.
Jonathan R. Witt
Lubbock, Texas
March 31, 2003
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.