Discovery Institute: Grain of Salt

One of the Discovery Institutes general stances supports the research challenging the findings of the neo-Darwinism theory and the opposition of mandates making educators teach intelligent design. Through digging around the Discovery Institute site there are certain rhetorical powers and efforts given by the staff that further develops their case. Through the reading, “Beyond the Realm of Reason” Brown and Herdnl evaluate the different rhetoric and “nonsense” given forth by the John Birch Society and how their cultural analysis of the writing of the Society affect both the American public and the rhetoric of the opposition of the John Birch Society.

“If we can understand what the John Brich Society is up to, rhetorically, in their writings on the environment, we may also understand what we are up to in the part of our own rhetoric that lies beyond the logic.” (p.217) Taking this passage and applying to the Discovery Institute we (meaning CSCL 1001) can start to analyze the meaning behind why and more importantly how culturally they are giving forth their ideals. Although we are not necessarily opposed to or in agreement with the Discovery Institute by being able to read how they present their findings we can further understand our own interpretation along with the actual opposition.

I want to move further in applying an example given in “Beyond the Realm of Reason” and match it with a finding on the Discovery Institute website. The finding for the discovery sight is an article written by Phillip E. Johnson on the discovery sight states, “What I hope readers of these two books will appreciate is that conflicting scientific claims can only be properly adjudicated by impartially investigating the evidence, and not by excluding an important claim because of an a priori philosophical bias, such as by incorporating the opposing claim into the definition of ‘science.’” Although this itself is an analysis of reading scientific findings it is inline with a point made in “Beyond the Realm of Reason” while examining the article “The Resilient Earth” specifically ‘The Fury of Mother Nature.’ In its analysis Brown and Herdnl state that ‘The Fury of Mother Nature’ exhibit scientific facts that are irrelevant to the point that it is making. This irrelevance is a rhetorical strategy that pushes common sense in order to influence and persuade an audience. Its connection with the Johnson article is important when realizing that both state that using discretion when reading scientific findings is important not only on a logical/educational level but also on a rhetoric level.

So by reading these two pieces a certain grain of salt must be taken with the Discovery Institute. They make no secret as to what their objectives are on their website and so it should be obvious to point out the rhetoric exhibited. Although it may be obvious for some people, it may not be obvious to others (like the American public discussed in “Beyond the Realm of Reason.”) Thus it is important to look out for rhetoric in text books, magazines, and of course the always accurate internet.