Cargando…
Experiential Thinking in Creationism—A Textual Analysis
Creationism is a religiously motivated worldview in denial of biological evolution that has been very resistant to change. We performed a textual analysis by examining creationist and pro-evolutionary texts for aspects of “experiential thinking”, a cognitive process different from scientific thought...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4348421/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25734650 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118314 |
_version_ | 1782359916199018496 |
---|---|
author | Nieminen, Petteri Ryökäs, Esko Mustonen, Anne-Mari |
author_facet | Nieminen, Petteri Ryökäs, Esko Mustonen, Anne-Mari |
author_sort | Nieminen, Petteri |
collection | PubMed |
description | Creationism is a religiously motivated worldview in denial of biological evolution that has been very resistant to change. We performed a textual analysis by examining creationist and pro-evolutionary texts for aspects of “experiential thinking”, a cognitive process different from scientific thought. We observed characteristics of experiential thinking as follows: testimonials (present in 100% of sampled creationist texts), such as quotations, were a major form of proof. Confirmation bias (100% of sampled texts) was represented by ignoring or dismissing information that would contradict the creationist hypothesis. Scientifically irrelevant or flawed information was re-interpreted as relevant for the falsification of evolution (75–90% of sampled texts). Evolutionary theory was associated to moral issues by demonizing scientists and linking evolutionary theory to atrocities (63–93% of sampled texts). Pro-evolutionary rebuttals of creationist claims also contained testimonials (93% of sampled texts) and referred to moral implications (80% of sampled texts) but displayed lower prevalences of stereotypical thinking (47% of sampled texts), confirmation bias (27% of sampled texts) and pseudodiagnostics (7% of sampled texts). The aspects of experiential thinking could also be interpreted as argumentative fallacies. Testimonials lead, for instance, to ad hominem and appeals to authorities. Confirmation bias and simplification of data give rise to hasty generalizations and false dilemmas. Moral issues lead to guilt by association and appeals to consequences. Experiential thinking and fallacies can contribute to false beliefs and the persistence of the claims. We propose that science educators would benefit from the systematic analysis of experiential thinking patterns and fallacies in creationist texts and pro-evolutionary rebuttals in order to concentrate on scientific misconceptions instead of the scientifically irrelevant aspects of the creationist—evolutionist debate. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4348421 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-43484212015-03-06 Experiential Thinking in Creationism—A Textual Analysis Nieminen, Petteri Ryökäs, Esko Mustonen, Anne-Mari PLoS One Research Article Creationism is a religiously motivated worldview in denial of biological evolution that has been very resistant to change. We performed a textual analysis by examining creationist and pro-evolutionary texts for aspects of “experiential thinking”, a cognitive process different from scientific thought. We observed characteristics of experiential thinking as follows: testimonials (present in 100% of sampled creationist texts), such as quotations, were a major form of proof. Confirmation bias (100% of sampled texts) was represented by ignoring or dismissing information that would contradict the creationist hypothesis. Scientifically irrelevant or flawed information was re-interpreted as relevant for the falsification of evolution (75–90% of sampled texts). Evolutionary theory was associated to moral issues by demonizing scientists and linking evolutionary theory to atrocities (63–93% of sampled texts). Pro-evolutionary rebuttals of creationist claims also contained testimonials (93% of sampled texts) and referred to moral implications (80% of sampled texts) but displayed lower prevalences of stereotypical thinking (47% of sampled texts), confirmation bias (27% of sampled texts) and pseudodiagnostics (7% of sampled texts). The aspects of experiential thinking could also be interpreted as argumentative fallacies. Testimonials lead, for instance, to ad hominem and appeals to authorities. Confirmation bias and simplification of data give rise to hasty generalizations and false dilemmas. Moral issues lead to guilt by association and appeals to consequences. Experiential thinking and fallacies can contribute to false beliefs and the persistence of the claims. We propose that science educators would benefit from the systematic analysis of experiential thinking patterns and fallacies in creationist texts and pro-evolutionary rebuttals in order to concentrate on scientific misconceptions instead of the scientifically irrelevant aspects of the creationist—evolutionist debate. Public Library of Science 2015-03-03 /pmc/articles/PMC4348421/ /pubmed/25734650 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118314 Text en © 2015 Nieminen et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Nieminen, Petteri Ryökäs, Esko Mustonen, Anne-Mari Experiential Thinking in Creationism—A Textual Analysis |
title | Experiential Thinking in Creationism—A Textual Analysis |
title_full | Experiential Thinking in Creationism—A Textual Analysis |
title_fullStr | Experiential Thinking in Creationism—A Textual Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Experiential Thinking in Creationism—A Textual Analysis |
title_short | Experiential Thinking in Creationism—A Textual Analysis |
title_sort | experiential thinking in creationism—a textual analysis |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4348421/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25734650 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118314 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nieminenpetteri experientialthinkingincreationismatextualanalysis AT ryokasesko experientialthinkingincreationismatextualanalysis AT mustonenannemari experientialthinkingincreationismatextualanalysis |