Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
2,652 bytes added ,  12:32, February 14, 2009
add details and bibliog
Line 1: Line 1: −
The '''Scopes Trial''', sometimes known as the "Scopes monkey trial," took place in the small hill town of Dayton, in east [[Tennessee]] in 1925. It was a test case brought to challenge to the state's Butler Act which prohibited public schools from teaching the theory that man had evolved from more primitive life forms. The willing defendant, high school teacher [[John Scopes]], had indeed used the textbook ''[[A Civic Biology]]'' that included a unit on evolution. He was duly convicted, although this was later overturned on a technicality.  The trial was a national media sensation, pitting evolution versus the Bible.
+
The '''Scopes Trial''', sometimes known as the '''"monkey trial,"''' took place in the small hill town of Dayton, in east [[Tennessee]] in 1925. It was a test case brought to challenge to the state's Butler Act which prohibited public schools from teaching the theory that man had evolved from more primitive life forms. The willing defendant, high school teacher [[John Scopes]], had indeed used the textbook ''[[A Civic Biology]]'' that included a unit on evolution. He was duly convicted, although this was later overturned on a technicality.  The trial was a national media sensation, pitting evolution versus the Bible.
 
== Publicity Motivation ==
 
== Publicity Motivation ==
 
The impetus for the Scopes trial began in a meeting among town leaders at a drugstore in Dayton, Tennessee, in response to a newspaper advertisement placed by the American Civil Liberties Union ([[ACLU]]) offering to provide legal services to anyone willing to be prosecuted under the Butler Act.<ref>{{hnb|Larson|2006}}, {{hnb|Linder|2002}}.  See also {{hnb|Coulter|2006}}</ref>  Town leaders agreed that a trial would provide publicity to the town,<ref>{{hnb|Larson|2006}}</ref> whose population had dwindled to 1,800.<ref>{{hnb|Linder|2002}}</ref>  The town leaders found a willing defendant in John Scopes, a gym teacher and football coach who also substituted (sometimes as a biology teacher), though Scopes could not recall ever teaching evolution.<ref>{{hnb|Larson|2006}}.  See also {{hnb|Coulter|2006}}</ref>  John Scopes told the town leaders, "If you can prove that I've taught evolution and that I can qualify as a defendant, then I'll be willing to stand trial."
 
The impetus for the Scopes trial began in a meeting among town leaders at a drugstore in Dayton, Tennessee, in response to a newspaper advertisement placed by the American Civil Liberties Union ([[ACLU]]) offering to provide legal services to anyone willing to be prosecuted under the Butler Act.<ref>{{hnb|Larson|2006}}, {{hnb|Linder|2002}}.  See also {{hnb|Coulter|2006}}</ref>  Town leaders agreed that a trial would provide publicity to the town,<ref>{{hnb|Larson|2006}}</ref> whose population had dwindled to 1,800.<ref>{{hnb|Linder|2002}}</ref>  The town leaders found a willing defendant in John Scopes, a gym teacher and football coach who also substituted (sometimes as a biology teacher), though Scopes could not recall ever teaching evolution.<ref>{{hnb|Larson|2006}}.  See also {{hnb|Coulter|2006}}</ref>  John Scopes told the town leaders, "If you can prove that I've taught evolution and that I can qualify as a defendant, then I'll be willing to stand trial."
Line 10: Line 10:     
The [[ACLU]] challenged a Tennessee statute, the Butler Act, that imposed a fine for teaching in government schools that man descended from more primitive life forms.  The statute did not prohibit teaching most aspects of [[evolution]].  The textbook at issue in the case, ''[[A Civic Biology]]'',  taught evolution, stating that man was descended from lower life forms.   
 
The [[ACLU]] challenged a Tennessee statute, the Butler Act, that imposed a fine for teaching in government schools that man descended from more primitive life forms.  The statute did not prohibit teaching most aspects of [[evolution]].  The textbook at issue in the case, ''[[A Civic Biology]]'',  taught evolution, stating that man was descended from lower life forms.   
 +
===Textbook issues===
 +
The ambiguous nature of scientific diagrams of evolution led to much public confusion and fueled the fireworks at the trial. Prosecutor Bryan argued against a textbook diagram that placed humans in a seemingly insignificant position, included with other mammals in a small circle, while lower forms such as insects appeared more prominently. Other visual representations, especially family trees and linear comparisons of primate skeletons failed to depict the influence of time, making humans appear more closely related to apes than scientists intended to suggest. Such diagrams were extensively used in books and cartoons aimed at popular audiences, making the controversial assumption that "man is descended from monkeys" the most common view of evolution, even though scientists had yet to reach a consensus on the matter. Despite efforts by paleontologists such as the president of the American Museum of Natural History, Henry Fairfield Osborn, to defend evolution while upholding religious belief, the popular - though misleading - images proved more persuasive.<ref> Clark (2000)</ref>
    +
 +
==Bryan vs Darrow==
 +
Bryan and Darrow were both liberal Democrats who had cooperated in politics for many years. This times they were opponents, and much of the fireworks exploded during their confrontations.
 +
 
Bryan quoted for the court how Darrow had previously claimed that murder defendants Leopold and Loeb were driven to crime by what they were taught, which was [[Nietzsche]]'s atheistic philosophy.  Bryan quoted Darrow as saying that "Is there any blame attached because somebody took Nietzsche's philosophy seriously and fashioned his life on it? ... The university would be more to blame than he is. ...  Your honor, it is hardly fair to hang a 19-year-old boy for the philosophy that was taught him at the university."
 
Bryan quoted for the court how Darrow had previously claimed that murder defendants Leopold and Loeb were driven to crime by what they were taught, which was [[Nietzsche]]'s atheistic philosophy.  Bryan quoted Darrow as saying that "Is there any blame attached because somebody took Nietzsche's philosophy seriously and fashioned his life on it? ... The university would be more to blame than he is. ...  Your honor, it is hardly fair to hang a 19-year-old boy for the philosophy that was taught him at the university."
   Line 127: Line 133:     
Tennessee continued to downplay evolution in its schools until 2005.<ref>http://www.edexcellence.net/institute/publication/publication.cfm?id=352&pubsubid=1169#1169</ref>
 
Tennessee continued to downplay evolution in its schools until 2005.<ref>http://www.edexcellence.net/institute/publication/publication.cfm?id=352&pubsubid=1169#1169</ref>
 +
==Immediate impact==
 +
Edwards (2000) contradicts the conventional view that in the wake of the Scopes trial a humiliated fundamentalism retreated into the political and cultural background, a viewpoint evidenced in the movie "Inherit the Wind" and the majority of contemporary historical accounts. Rather, the cause of fundamentalism's retreat was the death of its leader, Bryan. Most fundamentalists saw the trial as a victory and not a defeat, but Bryan's death soon after created a leadership void that no other fundamentalist leader could fill. Bryan, unlike the other leaders, brought name recognition, respectability, and the ability to forge a broad-based coalition of fundamentalist and mainline religious groups to argue for the antievolutionist position.
 +
    
==Memory==
 
==Memory==
Line 135: Line 144:  
<references/>
 
<references/>
 
==Sources==
 
==Sources==
 +
* Clark, Constance Areson. "Evolution for John Doe: Pictures, The Public, and the Scopes Trial Debate." ''Journal of American History'' 2000 87(4): 1275-1303. 0021-8723
 +
 +
* Conkin, Paul K. ''When All the Gods Trembled: Darwinism, Scopes, and American Intellectuals.'' (1998). 185 pp.
 
*{{Harvard reference
 
*{{Harvard reference
 
  | Surname    = Coulter
 
  | Surname    = Coulter
Line 152: Line 164:  
  | ID          = ISBN 978-0465075102
 
  | ID          = ISBN 978-0465075102
 
  }}
 
  }}
 +
* Edwards, Mark. "Rethinking the Failure of Fundamentalist Political Antievolutionism after 1925". ''Fides Et Historia'' 2000 32(2): 89-106. 0884-5379
 
*{{Harvard reference
 
*{{Harvard reference
 
  | Surname    = Linder  
 
  | Surname    = Linder  
Line 160: Line 173:  
  | URL        = http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/evolut.htm
 
  | URL        = http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/evolut.htm
 
}} Retrieved on 05-11-2007
 
}} Retrieved on 05-11-2007
 +
* Smout, Kary Doyle. ''The Creation/Evolution Controversy: A Battle for Cultural Power.'' (1998). 210 pp.
   −
[[Category:United States Law]]
   
[[category:evolution]]
 
[[category:evolution]]
 
[[category:creationism]]
 
[[category:creationism]]
 +
[[category:Fundamentalism]]
 +
[[category:1920s]]
17,394

edits

Navigation menu