BreakPoint: Liberalism in a Lab Coat

The March to Redefine Science

It seems every weekend brings a march for one cause or another in D.C. Last weekend, folks marched for science. Or did they?

In his preface to “Mere Christianity,” C. S. Lewis explains what happens when words lose their original meaning. Take the word “gentleman.” Once upon a time, Lewis writes, a gentleman was “one who had a coat of arms and some landed property. When you called someone ‘a gentleman,’ you were not paying him a compliment, but merely stating a fact.”

Gradually, however, “gentleman” evolved into just that—a compliment. A true gentleman was no longer someone who met the objective qualifications, but a person whom the speaker liked. Thus, concludes Lewis, “gentleman” became a useless word.

I think another important word is undergoing this same redefinition. That word, alas, is science.

There was a time when “science” meant the systematic pursuit of knowledge through experimentation and observation. But it’s rapidly becoming a synonym for progressive politics and materialist philosophy.

To be labeled a “science-denier” in 2017 often just means you’ve upset someone who insists on teaching strict, Darwinian orthodoxy in schools, or who advocates particular climate legislation, or who supports ethically fraught research on embryos.

In contrast, being “pro-science” has become a shibboleth for supporting progressive ideology. Think of a recent ad by National Geographic with the caption, “Stand behind the facts. Stand with science. Stand for the planet.” But just weeks prior, National Geographic had run a cover depicting a nine-year-old boy dressed as a girl. Because, as we know, they stand with science.

But if there were ever going to be a ceremony inaugurating this new and useless definition of science, it’s got to be last weekend’s “March for Science” in the nation’s capital, co-chaired by Bill Nye, “the science guy.” Nye, a children’s TV host from the nineties with no formal training as a scientist, has recaptured the spotlight with his videos on climate change, abortion, women’s rights, and other topics.

To say his arguments in some of these videos are embarrassing is being kind. For instance, in one odd and rambling speech promoting abortion, Nye claimed that because many lives end through natural causes before they leave the womb that it’s okay for us to kill the unborn ourselves. That’s like saying it’s okay to kill adults, because millions die of natural causes. That does not stop Nye’s supporters from honoring him as a champion of science.

But not all of the marchers are fans. After issuing several revisions to his massive “Statement on Diversity and Inclusion,” the organizers of the March for Science are fending off critics who complain that Nye is a white male whose fame is the result of privilege. One wonders who, exactly, was in charge of this debacle. An official tweet, which has since been deleted, declared that “Colonization, racism, immigration, native rights, sexism, ableism, queer-, trans-, intersex-phobia, & econ[omic] justice are scientific issues.”

Heather Wilhelm at National Review got it right when she wrote that the whole event was collapsing into a civil war of competing left-wing agendas.

I hope someone—anyone—who still believes science has a definition independent of politics will speak up. Because whether it’s the denial that life begins at conception, the denial of sex and gender as biological facts, the denial of decades of research proving that children do best with their father and mother, or the denial of dissenting voices on Darwinism, the left has proven quite capable of ignoring science.

Language is powerful. Words matter. And “science”—real science—is too important a word for us to let go the way of “gentleman.”

Further Reading and Information

Liberalism in a Lab Coat: The March to Redefine Science

Don’t be fooled by ideology wrapped in the mantle of science. For more on this topic, see the article below.


The Left’s New Cure-All: ‘Science’
  • Heather Wilhelm | National Review | April 12, 2017

Comment Policy: Commenters are welcome to argue all points of view, but they are asked to do it civilly and respectfully. Comments that call names, insult other people or groups, use profanity or obscenity, repeat the same points over and over, or make personal remarks about other commenters will be deleted. After multiple infractions, commenters may be banned.

  • Gene

    “Science” not only needs to resist being redefined by liberals, but by its distortion by corporations and well-funded industry associations, i.e. astroturfing.

  • Barbara Abbey

    What is going on reminds me of the 1982 new wave song by Magnus Pyke and sung by Thomas Doyle, “She blinded me with science…” I was training to volunteer at The Natural History Museum in Albuquerque, the trainer told us we had to talk about evolution. I asked if we could bring up creation theory to contrast the two. We were told science could not be questioned. Not wishing to propagate what I considered evolutionary propaganda, I left the training.

  • jason taylor

    Lewis was only partly right. Even when gentleman was a compliment rather then a class description it tended to imply not just virtue but those virtues which said class was expected to prioritize in ideal form. Victor Lazlo was a gentleman, Rick Blaine was a night club owner and we do not know who either of their ancestors are.

  • You need to read the Wiki paje about Bill Nye. Then write an apology.

  • jason taylor

    How do you “march” for science? Is that perhaps a controlled experiment to find out that formation is more easily maintained by cadence step or that column is more maneuverable but one has to redeploy into line to give fire efficiently?

  • MLipenk

    I’m guessing part of the March For “Science” included denying basic biology 101… that men have XY chromosomes and women have XX chromosomes, and nobody can change that. Just like Bill Nye denies it.