Belief in Creationism Doesn’t Necessarily Mean You Don’t Understand How Science Works

Dan Kahan over at the
invaluable Yale Cultural Cognition Project has conducted an
interesting poll of 2,000 Americans inquiring into what they

know and believe about creationism and evolutionary biology.
Based on his results, Kahan concludes that “belief” in evolution is
more of a measure of who people are and not what
they know.

Specifically, Kahan contrasts the responses to versions of
survey questions about the origin of human beings as asked by the
National Science Foundation (NSF) and the General Social Science
(GSS) survey. The NSF asks: “Human beings, as we know them today,
developed from earlier species of animals. True or false? 55
percent selected true.

The GSS asks: “According to the theory of evolution, human
beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of
animals. True or false? 81 percent selected true. Kahan
observes:

By adding the introductory clause, “According to the theory of
evolution,” the GSS question
disentangles (“unconfounds” in psychology-speak) the
“science knowledge” component and the “identity expressive”
components of the item.

In other words, the NSF question comes off as asking people
about their religious beliefs, not their understanding of what
science says. Evidently many religious Americans can understand the
scientists’ explanation for how evolutionary biology works while
still believing in the special divine creation of Adam and Eve.
[

In any case, the new results of the
Values and Beliefs poll by Gallup were just reported. Since
1982, Gallup folks have every so often asked:

Which of the following statements come closest to your views on
the origin and development of human beings? (1) Human beings have
developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life,
but God guided the process; (2) Human beings have developed over
millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God had not
part in this process; (3) God created human beings pretty much in
their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or
so.

In this latest iteration, 42 percent of Americans believe that
humans were created by God in their present form within the last
10,000 years; 31 percent believe that a Celestial hand helped guide
the process of evolution; and 19 percent believe that humans
evolved without Divine intervention.

The Gallup poll researchers further observe:

Sixty-four percent of those who are very familiar with the
theory of evolution choose one of the two evolutionary explanations
for the origin of humans, compared with 28% among the smaller group
of Americans who report being not too or not at all familiar with
it. The majority [57 percent] of those not familiar with evolution
choose the creationist viewpoint.

These relationships do not necessarily prove that if Americans
were to learn more about evolution they would be more likely to
believe in it. Those with less education are most likely to espouse
the creationist view and to be least familiar with evolution, but
it’s not clear that gaining more education per se would shift their
perspectives. Many religious Americans accept creationism mostly on
the basis of their religious convictions. Whether their beliefs
would change if they became more familiar with evolution is an open
question.

Kahan’s point is that it is possible for people to understand
the workings of evolutionary biology without changing their
religious beliefs.

Nevertheless, and with due respect, I can’t quite bring myself
to think that such a position is an example of F. Scott
Fitzgerald’s observation:

The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two
opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the
ability to function.