Wednesday, April 30, 2008

Expelled forum provides intellectual discourse on controversial film

By Mike Orren

DALLAS — Around 8:30 last night it occurred to me that for the second time in a week I was sitting in the Angelika Dallas listening to geeks ask questions so arcane that I couldn't even guess where they were going.

Don't get me wrong-- I'm a card-carrying geek, but when the topic drifts to the science of evolution and intelligent design as covered in the film Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, I'm a bit out of my depth. Doubly so, since I'll have to confess that I still haven't seen the film which has engendered so much debate on the Interwebs in general and on our site in particular.

So I may not be the ideal scribe for the proceedings at last night's discussion, presented by the Dallas Philosopher's Forum. But, The Film Guy had other, more ferrous duties to attend to and our other movie buff is on the injured reserve. So my report will be more on the proceedings, leaving discussion of the film itself to those who've, well, seen it.

The purpose of the event, which broke from the Philosopher's Forum's usual lecture format, and drew an unusual large crowd of a couple hundred (enough to nearly fill one theater at the Angelika, was to use the film "to explore issues of science and religion, philosophy of science, academic freedom, and other related topics."

After the panel was introduced by the dashing young president of an upstart local media concern, DPF president Andrew Laska (who is also a PegNews Content Partner) took on moderator duties, giving each of the panelists a few minutes to make introductory points before he asked them individual questions and then handed off to the audience.

Frank Sherwin, Science Editor, Institute for Creation Research: Frank spoke in favor of the film and its premise. His opening remarks were strictly directed to specific controversies about the film (so were somewhat beyond my judgment). In general, he presented evidence related to several of the scientists the film claims were ostracized or fired because of their views on intelligent design. He also addressed misconceptions that the film's narrator, Ben Stein, was pushing an intelligent design agenda, but that "he was advocating free thought." He also drew a clear line between macro- and micro- evolution, saying that one could reconcile evolution post-creation with intelligent design.

Stephen Levene, Professor of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of Texas at Dallas: While Stephen said that the film was "full of distortions, half-truths and fallacies...typical of creationism and intelligent design," he spent more time on the scientific debates than the movie itself. Taking evolution as the "organizing principle of modern biology," he went so far as to say that intelligent design advocates are causing society harm because "the supernatural does not advance science ... and it wastes resources that could be put towards research that cures disease and creates medicines."

Rick Worland, Chair, Division of Cinema-Television, Meadows School of the Arts, Southern Methodist University: Although Rick made clear that he had more affinity for the evolutionist point of view, he primarily addressed Expelled in the context of how well it made its case as a documentary. He rebuffed the idea that the work was propaganda, saying "Anything that is recognized as propaganda has failed as propaganda." Although he had a really positive opinion of Stein before the film, he left with a more negative one. He felt the film had primarily failed at the box office not because of any backlash against its point of view, but because of its over-the-top presentation and tone: "People are really tired of the culture wars," he said. "The movie could have been done better and been more convincing." Later in the discussion, he said that "[The film] won't convince anyone who isn't already convinced. It's preaching to the choir. There was more information in the opening powepoints today than in the movie."

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

"EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed," starring Ben Stein, follows his journey around the globe where he discovers that scientists, educators and philosophers are being persecuted in a modern day witch hunt because they dare to go against the theory of evolution. These pillars of education are being fired, ridiculed and ostracized for merely challenging Darwin's theory; proposing that life on this planet could be a part of some intelligent design and not random chance. This thought-provoking documentary not only forces us to question what we have been taught but challenges us to ask, "What else is being kept from us?"

Source: Cinema Source

• Showtimes and more on Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

Both the moderator and audience Q&A really surprised me in that it was both engaging and largely rooted in scientific debate (as opposed to the ad hominem and wild conjecture we've seen in other discussions of the film). Granted, there was a lot of semantic wrangling (defining "science"; the difference between "magic" and "the supernatural," but it was all disarmingly civil, if a bit smug. Clearly the panelists and most, if not all, of the roughly evenly-divided questioners were convinced of their positions and confident in their supporting evidence, so there wasn't a lot of headway to be made.

I'll confess that this is where I started to wander a bit. When the discussion gets to the finer points of chromatins, nucleotides, genomes and heterogeneous katalisis, all I hear is a highfallutin' version of "yes it is/no it isn't."

So the questions, while extremely civil, were more about making points than gaining knowledge. As I looked back at the queue of questioners patiently salivating for their opportunity to jump into the fray, I couldn't think of anything but Jerry Springer conducting an NPR roundtable. Except that the Springer audience doesn't bring its questions and supporting notes in moleskine notebooks.

Rick Worland saw hope in the fact that "this gathering shows that people who disagree can get together and discuss their differences." I did too, and hope that this exposes the Dallas Philosophers Forum to a larger audience who will join in future programming about more easily soluble issues like "Existentialism and the radical character of human freedom."

Pegasus News was a media sponsor of this event.

Related stories

• Pegasus News Week in View: Mayday Edition (May 1, 2008)

See more stories in:

• Arts > Movies / Film > Independent Films
• Science

Comments

Mike Orren Staff

This didn't really have a place in the story, but in finding links, I noticed that the Institute for Creation Research was recently denied a Certificate of Authority to grant degrees in Texas:

http://www.icr.org/article/3855/

4 months, 1 week ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Scott Doyle Verified

"the supernatural does not advance science ... and it wastes resources that could be put towards research that cures disease and creates medicines."

Sums up this whole ordeal, imo.

4 months, 1 week ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Andrew Laska Verified

Mike I am glad you wrote this so I didn't have to! :) I wanted to personally thank you afterward but I got mobbed and I didn't catch you before you left. Pegasus was a great supporter of this event. I was nervous about moderating this but I was glad afterward.

I hope Pegasus saw this as a positive event as difficult as it was. I thought the panelists did what they intended to do representing their viewpoints. Dr Worland was a great presence to bring us back to the film on a number of occasions. He offered some great insight that would otherwise be missed in this discussion.

For the sake of transparency and completeness, my material submitted to Pegasus through a content partner has nothing to do with the Dallas Philosophers Forum. Its merely a coincidence I am involved in both.

4 months, 1 week ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Rachel Skinner Verified

"the supernatural does not advance science ... and it wastes resources that could be put towards research that cures disease and creates medicines."

That's not the point at all. Just because we believe God made the plant doesn't mean we don't have every intent and desire to find out all we can about that plant and what it does and could do.

4 months, 1 week ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Rick Yost Verified

Oh but Rachel, Doyle's point, IS the point. If your god made the plant, I guess he made the disease as well. If you find a way to fight the disease from the plant, wouldn't you be challenging his design?
Funny how these questions are tied together sometimes eh?

4 months, 1 week ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

OpusthePoet Anonymous

I couldn't make it to the debate, but did anybody ask the question of what as yet unobserved phenomina has been predicted by ID "science", and under what circumstances this previously missed data might be observed? This has been the point about ID that has always bothered me, as far as I have been able to determine ID says "G-d made everything, all at once, in the recent past" and then has nothing more to say. If I'm wrong, I would be delighted to know what ID has to say about what happens after the sudden creation, and also how to explain the fossil record, most especially all the species that are extinct now and have nothing remotely like them in the modern world.

Opus

4 months, 1 week ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )

Rick Yost Verified

It's a mystery.

4 months, 1 week ago ( Link to this comment | Suggest removal )