By referring to page one of Origin of Species, Scopes had disobeyed the law and the school district policy and impaired his status as a teacher. According to political theorist and philosopher Hannah Arendt of the early twentieth century, Scopes had acted against the will of his society and acted without true purpose. Arendt believes that action consists primarily of two spheres: freedom and plurality. Rather, she argues that freedom is the capacity to enact something new and do the unexpected, only possible because of man being born.
Because man is born, because of natality, there is a promise of a new opportunity to be pursued. Still, acting cannot be performed with isolation of others.
Hence, she emphasizes plurality as a supplement to freedom. With the variety of perspectives — and hence judgment — of others, action has a purpose in the context of plurality. Therefore, action requires the consent of others, the approval of society, and the synchronization with the thoughts and ideals of the community. Sir John Thomas Scopes inhabited a town wherein the majority did not see his actions as righteous.
Rather, most of the town had been devout Christians, adamant in their views presented in Genesis on the origin of man.
Because Scopes behaved on his own behalf, and without eliciting the consent of the community, he did not practice a freedom of action, but rather practiced an act of selfishness. Another figure shares similar thoughts to those of Arendt. German philosopher of the eighteenth century, Immanuel Kant, argues a position that also finds the actions of Scopes as unjustified and guilty.
Through one of his most well-known works, What is Enlightenment? The public sphere is a place where individuals are free from obligation of their calling, and subjects are free to speak or write critically.
Opposed to this, the private sphere is where people have an actual duty to restrain the expression of political judgment and withhold the critique of societal norms. His defined private role ensured that he would remain submissive and perform his job. If Scopes had wished to voice his opinions regarding evolution, Kant would argue that Scopes should pursue such inclinations in his public sphere, in writings outside of the classroom, potentially criticizing the school system and voicing his loyalty to Darwinian thought.
From there, he could garner public support and potentially lead a movement in changing the school curriculum. However, by articulating his beliefs inside the classroom, Scopes shattered the schism between the two spheres and broken the etiquette of the distribution of reason. The Scopes trial-some say a major turning point in US history-occurred 80 years ago this month. The Act forbade public education institutions from teaching that man was descended from a lower form of life.
The town leaders agreed and asked year-old John T. Scopes, who was in his first year as a science teacher and football coach at Dayton High School, if he would be willing to volunteer as the defendant in a test case of the Butler Act. Scopes agreed.
It is not commonly known that Scopes was not even a biology teacher and he had never taught evolution. Scopes had filled in for the regular biology teacher for two weeks during an illness and used the state-approved biology text, which contained a section on human evolution. The town leaders decided it was enough for the trial.
In mid-May, William Jennings Bryan, a Christian and former presidential candidate who believed in the revealed Word and who was perhaps the greatest orator of the day, telegraphed local prosecutors and expressed his willingness to be a member of the prosecution team, which the prosecutors accepted.
It was at this stage that Clarence Darrow, a self-professed agnostic and probably the best-known trial lawyer in America at the time, heard about the case and volunteered his services for the defense for free.
Butler Act. Center, I. Primer: Intelligent Design Theory in a Nutshell. Clarence Darrow. Epperson vs. An introductory Dictionary of Theology and Religious Studies. Liturgical Press. Fundamentalist Christianity.
George Rappleyea. Gibson, A. Horton, R. Retrieved July 10th, , from Bob Jones University. Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District. Larson, E. Linder, D. William Jennings Bryan. Robbins, D. Victorious Publications. Scopes Trial. Trollinger, W.
University of Wisconsin Press. Wilson, W. Legalism and the Authority of Scripture. We have detected that you are using extensions to block ads. If you would like to go ad-free, please purchase a full subscription on Substack. Skip to content. The Pen. Bryan and Darrow at Dayton. New York: Arthur Lee and Company. Anderson, P. Several individuals associated with the trial were also affected, including Scopes and his family. For example, after enrolling in graduate school at the University of Chicago, John Scopes — in need of money — applied for a fellowship to pursue a PhD in geology.
The cash-strapped Scopes dropped out of school and never received a graduate degree Creviston, Lela was soon rehired in New York, where she continued her successful teaching career.
Despite her treatment, Lela never complained about what happened to her in Paducah. John Scopes's sister, Lela, was fired from her teaching job in Paducah, Kentucky, because she would not denounce her brother's views about teaching evolution. The Scopes Trial has been linked with several social ideals e. Given the notoriety of Scopes's trial, I questioned this, but found no conflicting information in written accounts of the trial's impact on John Scopes's life after Dayton.
There were mentions of what happened to Lela, but other members of John Scopes's family were never quoted or cited, and I wondered what they might say if anything about the impact of their famous relative's famous trial if given the opportunity to speak for themselves.
During the past eight years, I've visited multiple times with a variety of descendants, friends, and colleagues of John Scopes and his wife, Mildred Scopes Moore, For most of Scopes's relatives, my questions were the first they had ever been asked about John Scopes by a researcher, and I was only the second researcher to contact John Scopes Jr.
During my interviews, I heard countless stories, studied family scrapbooks, and learned much new information about John Scopes. One of the meetings with John Scopes Jr. For the topics presented here, the stories were consistent and informative. One thing is clear: John Scopes was wrong.
His trial has affected — and continues to affect — many people. For example, when John Jr. The family, and others, noticed — and knew the reason for — the church's exceptional treatment of his middle name.
Similarly, in the early s, a great-grandniece of John Scopes who wishes to remain anonymous and her husband were expecting a child. They planned to continue a family tradition by using the name of one of their ancestors as their child's middle name.
0コメント