Anthropology: Darwinists vs. humanists

Get a load of this:

Today, anthropology is at war with itself. The discipline has divided into two schools of thought - the social anthropologists and the evolutionary anthropologists. The schism between the two is simple but deeply ingrained. Academics in the subject clearly align themselves with one side or the other; once that choice is made it defines their career.

The division lies in the question of whether or not anthropology is a science, and if it accepts that Darwinian evolutionary theory guides research into human behaviour and the development of societies.

In other words, Darwinism is once again spreading its malign influence into some hapless discipline.

Personally, I would ask one single, simple question of anyone who wants to be an anthropologist: Do you believe that the Big Bazooms theory of human evolution makes more sense than conventional explanations of why men are attracted to abundance (big bazooms, big steaks, big engines)?

If that person says yes, yes, I do, I do believe in Darwin! ... recommend to him or her a career with a Canadian "human rights" Commission, will you? We are in the process of deep-sixing those people's careers in Canada, so a few more down the drain will make no difference. We must restore some kind of integrity in some sciences, at least.

Find out why there is an intelligent design controversy: