A Case of Sustained Internal Contradiction: Unresolved Ambivalence between Evolution and Creationism

In: Journal of Cognition and Culture
S. Emlen Metz Postdoctoral Scholar, Department of Physics, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA US

Search for other papers by S. Emlen Metz in
Current site
Google Scholar
Deena Skolnick Weisberg Assistant Professor, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Villanova University Villanova, PA US

Search for other papers by Deena Skolnick Weisberg in
Current site
Google Scholar
, and
Michael Weisberg Professor and Chair, Department of Philosophy, University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, PA US

Search for other papers by Michael Weisberg in
Current site
Google Scholar
Download Citation Get Permissions

Access options

Get access to the full article by using one of the access options below.

Institutional Login

Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials

Login via Institution


Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):



Many people feel the pull of both creationism and evolution as explanations for the origin of species, despite the direct contradiction. Some respond by endorsing theistic evolution, integrating the scientific and religious explanations by positing that God initiated or guided the process of evolution. Others, however, simultaneously endorse both evolution and creationism despite the contradiction. Here, we illustrate this puzzling phenomenon with interviews with a diverse sample. This qualitative data reveals several approaches to coping with simultaneous inconsistent explanations. For example, some people seem to manage this contradiction by separating out ideological claims, which prioritize identity expression, from fact claims, which prioritize truth. Fitting with this interpretation, ambivalent individuals tended to call explanations “beliefs” (not knowledge), avoid mention of truth or falsity, and ground one or both beliefs in identity and personal history. We conclude with a brief discussion of the affordances of this distinction.

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 634 89 3
Full Text Views 39 4 0
PDF Views & Downloads 54 7 0