This document is a great piece that shows not just one side of the story but both at the same time. You not only see Clarence Darrow's scientific values and need for evidence to back thing up. But also William Jennings Bryan easy going way, of what is written is written.
Bryan made a good point when he was asked if he takes the Bible at face value. His response was that,"some of the Bible is given illustratively." This is very true. The bible uses metaphor and similes throughout the whole thing to get God's word across. Bryan also brought up the fact that we only estimate when things in history happen, no one really knows for sure. This shows that he not only reads and understands the bible, but understands that some things we will never truly know.
On the other hand Darrow should great understanding of civilizations. He talked about civilizations in China, way before Noah's Ark came about. He asked Bryan, "Do you know of any scientific man on the face of this earth that will believe such a thing?" Talking about if our human race showed up in the last 4,200 years.
Both of these men made amazing points. Bryan had quite a lot more emotion then Darrow. But Darrow had tons of logic. Both sides had compelling insights, and for me I still do not know which one I believe is right. Thats why this is an important piece of history, because it challenges you to really look at the "truth" and to decide for yourself what is wrong or right.
I agree with you that this document only shows a little bit of what was going on. If I were to come up with an opinion of who won the argument from this one document it would be difficult. In some way they both made very good points and show that they both new their subject matter well. I think Bryan was very intelligent in sticking to what he knew and not giving into Darrow’s questions, for example when Darrow keeps questioning him about the date of the flood and I love his answer I do not think about things I don’t think about (pg.158) Darrow also went on to make some good arguments when he ask how old the Egyptian civilizations is, know full well that they claim to be over 4,000 years old.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading a little more about the trial, I found it interesting that this trial was not about Scope, but about evolution and Christianity and these two characters above wanting to prove a point. In some ways both of them failed with the media circus they put on.
This document indeed shows not one side of the argument but both. Reading this part of history, really made me think hard, question many things and honestly, I felt as if I was there witnessing everything. Even though Darrow sounded very clever, and made stable points. I still really like how Bryan strongly defended what he believed in. For example, that he believed the world had been created in six days, and that Jonah had lived in the belly of a whale. Over all, Bryan’s argument sounded very convincing to me.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Erin that this is a clever document by these two men. I like seeing different points of views from other people when it comes down to topics such as religion and science. William Jennings Bryan's knowledge is clearly based on what is written inside the holy book and on the other hand Clarence Darrow based his understanding with logic. Both sides had very good arguements but just like Erin said, you have to look at the "truth" to decide what to believe in. Everyone is entitled to say what they want to and believe in whatever they wish. During the conversation of Bryan and Darrow, Bryan would sometimes beat around the bush instead of answering a direct question such as "I do not think about things I don’t think about" (158). Because of Darrow's straight forward statement such as "You insult every man of science and learning in the world because he does not believe in your fool religion"(159) I think Bryan's reply, "I have never felt a great deal of interest in the effort that has been made dispute the Bible by the speculations of men, or the investigations of men" was a very thoughtout statement.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the article and the book, I found a little more background that helped me better understand the situation at the time. William Jennings Bryan during the early 1920’s had been supporting legislation in fifteen states to ban the teaching of evolution (1). Bryan at this time had a lot of followers in the rural communities of America where traditional values and fundamentalist ideas were highly popular. Educated city modernists wanted to bring attention to what was going on and expose Bryan for what they felt was a fundamentalist zealot. Based on Bryan’s past behavior, Darrow knew he could get Bryan into a corner during the trial. As Tammi and Erin stated, Darrow questioned Bryan’s interpretation of the Bible as literal truth, but Bryan was slippery when trying to pin him down on specific dates and on who came first, the flood or ancient civilizations. I find the most interesting point being that this trial was about creationism, but when asked by Darrow, “And you never have investigated to find out how long man has been on the earth?” Bryan replied, “I have never found it necessary”. I find it ironic that a man who spent the last several years promoting creationism had never thought about it. I believe Bryan’s motivation was more about protecting fundamentalist values from the progresses of science.
ReplyDelete1. Linder, D. O., State v. John Scopes (“The Monkey Trial”), University of Missouri at Kansas City School of Law Research Paper. http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/evolut.htm