The letters by Keith Twombley, Dan Vlasak and Matt Billock regarding Andy Merrick’s letter of Aug. 25 were very good, but seemed to miss a few very important points. The Merrick letter seemed to indicate no understanding of the scientific method. Twombley’s statements that creationism “was the scientific model” and “made sense at the time” in reference to the historical origins of Biblical myths is completely in error. At no time has there been a reason to think the universe was created by a supernatural entity. The correct, logical answer to why the seasons change, who was the first man or what is our purpose is the simple admission, “I don’t know.” The only honest answer to whether we live on after our deaths is “there is no evidence to suggest we do.” To recognize one’s own ignorance is difficult. When Socrates said all he knew was that he did not know, he expressed an insight few moderns can appreciate (according to Alan Bloom). To truly recognize the limitations on one’s intellect, to carefully ask “How do I know this?” and to realize how one’s beliefs are influenced by others and by one’s needs, is a rare state of mental clarity. Creationists lack such clarity and represent its opposite, but rather than condemn such people we should try to understand the reason they flee reality. Childhood conditioning aside, they seem to be motivated by fear. The horror of mortality is so great that anything seems preferable. I understand this, as I too live with the fear of death. However, even at my most depressed and morbid I cannot imagine how anyone could view a universe ruled by a monstrously evil super-entity as better than the real one in which I’ll simply cease to exist in a few years. Roger J. M. Hughes

Senior

English