Evolutionary theory in letters to the editor

Abstract

This research note presents the results of a content analysis of 234 letters to the editors that discuss evolutionary theory and were published in American newspapers. We find that letters to the editor both support and hinder the cause of teaching evolutionary theory in American secondary schools. On the one hand, anti-evolutionary theory messages are marginalized in the letters section. This marginalization signals a low level of legitimacy for creationism. It might also contribute to the sense of tension that sustains creationist identities. On the other hand, relatively few letters explicitly note the fact that scientists or the scientific community accept evolution. Interestingly, the obscuration of the scientific community's support for evolutionary theory occurs both in letters supporting and opposing evolutionary theory.

Diversification and internationalization in the sociological study of science and religion

“…Based on ethnographic research at the Creation Museum in Kentucky, Oberlin () concluded that employees were frequently more concerned about operational matters such as visitor numbers than an epistemological clash between science and religion. Starting from a social movement perspective (as Oberlin did), Stobaugh and Snow () and Silva (, , ); Silva & Lowe, ) analyzed the framing of American public discourse around evolutionism and anti‐evolutionism. Stobaugh and Snow found that anti‐evolutionists' framing shifted with legal losses over time.…”

Highly esteemed science: An analysis of attitudes towards and perceived attributes of science in letters to the editor in two Dutch newspapers

“…This allows the data to reveal the various positive and negative attitudes towards science. Similar to Young (2013) and Silva and Lowe (2015), who analysed the debates on climate change and evolutionary theory, respectively, we use letters to the editor. This allows us to capture freely expressed thoughts, opinions and experiences.…”

Stigmatization and Validation of Atheism, Literalism, and Non-Literalism in the Discourse over Evolutionary Theory

“…The first has been reported on in Silva (2013) and an analysis of the second was recounted in Silva and Lowe (2015). I acquired the first sample from the NewsBank database.…”

“…Of the three letters that use the term "creation science," both also use search terms found in the previous sample, so no bias was introduced. Another study of this second sample has also been published elsewhere (Silva and Lowe 2015). Between the two collections, the sample includes 1,028 letters from 223 newspapers, in 47 states and Washington, D.C. were analyzed (all but Arkansas, Hawaii, and Rhode Island).…”

“…Accordingly, I define anti-evolutionist statements as those which directly argue for a reduction of the theory in the classroom (e.g., claiming the theory should not be taught, calling for the consideration of creationist alternatives) and/or those that contest it (e.g., claiming that evolution is atheistic, denigrating liberals who support evolutionary theory). By contrast, I define evolutionist statements as those that either 1. oppose any curricular diminution of the theory, 2. argue that others should accept the theory (e.g., mentioning the support of the scientific community), and/or 3. treat the acceptance of evolution as a given without referring to opposition (e.g., referring to research that is based on evolutionary theory (Silva and Lowe 2015)). 2 The term atheism rather than non-religion or secularism is appropriate here because it is the alleged godlessness of evolutionary theory that is at the crux of much anti-evolutionist discourse (see Lee 2012).…”