Scientific Approach
26 June 2007
Editor, The Washington Times
Dear Editor:
Arguing that the theory of natural selection is no more scientific than is the creed of creationism, Robert Wilcox asks rhetorically about natural selection: "does a scientific theory that not only has not been demonstrated in the laboratory, but, by its own admission, cannot be demonstrated in a laboratory, strike you as scientific?" (Letters, June 26).
Mr. Wilcox's question fails to make his point. Unlike objective evidence, dispassionate inquiry, and reason, laboratory demonstration is not a sine qua non of science. For example, Copernicus's and Galileo's unlocking of many truths about the solar system were not done in laboratories.
Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Chairman, Department of Economics
George Mason University
Editor, The Washington Times
Dear Editor:
Arguing that the theory of natural selection is no more scientific than is the creed of creationism, Robert Wilcox asks rhetorically about natural selection: "does a scientific theory that not only has not been demonstrated in the laboratory, but, by its own admission, cannot be demonstrated in a laboratory, strike you as scientific?" (Letters, June 26).
Mr. Wilcox's question fails to make his point. Unlike objective evidence, dispassionate inquiry, and reason, laboratory demonstration is not a sine qua non of science. For example, Copernicus's and Galileo's unlocking of many truths about the solar system were not done in laboratories.
Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Chairman, Department of Economics
George Mason University
Posted by Don Boudreaux on
Sunday February 3, 2008 at 12:27pm