Abstract

The present paper draws attention to the major differences in legal frameworks addressing the problem of creationism in Europe and in the United States. Although it may seem that European and US solutions share multiple similarities, after the close analysis we realize that the policy justification methods at the old and at the new continent are built on two different philosophies. The first one, legal, is inspired by the concept of the Wall of separation between church and state. The second one, epistemological, is based on the reflection in philosophy of science. In the long run, these two approaches may bring us to astoundingly different policy choices. This perspective article hopes to provide a strong conceptual foundation for policymakers having to deal with the problem of creationism as well as to invite researchers to more interdisciplinary studies about the place of ‘epistemic minorities’ in our society.

Highlights

  • From Scopes Trial to Kitzmiller V New Dover District, for the last hundred years legal disputes about the possibility of banning the teaching of evolution or about introducing creationism to public schools shaped the understanding of the concept of the wall of separation between church and state in the United States of America [1,2]

  • This fundamental constitutional rule expressed by Thomas Jefferson at the dawn of the American republic, and confirmed in the famous Everson v

  • In Europe these are not judges and legal precedent that answer the problem but public regulations applied by administration, in the end the result is the same

Read more

Summary

The creationist question over the world

From Scopes Trial to Kitzmiller V New Dover District, for the last hundred years legal disputes about the possibility of banning the teaching of evolution or about introducing creationism to public schools shaped the understanding of the concept of the wall of separation between church and state in the United States of America [1,2] This fundamental constitutional rule expressed by Thomas Jefferson at the dawn of the American republic, and confirmed in the famous Everson v. In Europe these are not judges and legal precedent that answer the problem but public regulations applied by administration, in the end the result is the same This common reductionism overlooks completely the fundamental, and much more profound, conceptual divide between Europe and the US, namely the rationale behind banning creationism. Its goal is not that much to provide precise answers but rather to stimulate creative thinking in a field that seems to be completely neglected by researchers

Legal background
Principles V policies
Conclusions

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.