Perhaps the most difficult kind of analysis that scholars may presume to make is that of presenting attitudes of people toward various ideas. Any poll can be affected by weakness in the sampling technique, by…
For every serious student of Utah’s history, there is a first time to visit the dusty archives or the microfilm files of the Salt Lake Tribune of half a century or more ago. Two impressions…
In the final chapter of this book appear the words: Someone has said that writing a man’s life is like sending a bucket into a deep well and drawing it out full, then dipping a…
To pass public judgment upon a work after a relatively cursory perusal seems, at best, a bit unfair, for each work, to the author, is more than the final product; and perhaps the reader can…
In a recent New Era article (August 1972) Arthur Henry King made an incisive comment about Mormon literature: Mormon artists, he said, “need not write especially for Mormons, and they need not write especially on…
Listen-up bird-lovers, Hindus, Eddy Rickenbacker, Father Schillebeechx, and Unitarians everywhere: Jonathan Livingston Seagull has arrived! Somewhat sooner and with greater flurry than many of us would have wished, perhaps, but, then, that’s his style, and…
The literature surveyed for this quarter’s bibliographical essay is from periodicals. Even the casual reader of this impressive list of recent works will notice that a high proportion of the reviewed literature concerns the “World Church.” From India to England, Tin Can Island to Finland, South Africa to Central America the Ensign and other journals report on the activities of the Church and present (albeit often superficially) introductions to the cultures of these lands.
Dialogue 8.3/4 (1973): 99–108
Over the years Henry Eyring’s status in the first rank of scientists has become secure. He has produced a staggering volume of research publications in the fields of his interests: application of quantum mechanics and statistical mechanics, radioactivity, theory of reaction rates, theory of liquids, rheology, molecular biology, optical rotation, and theory of flame.
Dialogue 8.3/4 (1973): 43–73
Ever since his great synthesis, Darwin’s name has been a source of discomfort to the religious world. Too sweeping to be fully fathomed, too revolutionary to be easily accepted, but too well documented to be ignored, his concepts of evolution1 by natural selection have been hotly debated now for well over a century.
For most of us, there is little doubt that science was victorious in its centuries-long warfare with theology. From Galileo—kneeling in the robes of a penitent criminal before his Inquisitors, pleading for mercy on the grounds of age and infirmity— we have come full circle, to William Jennings Bryan in the dock at the Scopes “Monkey Trial”—trying desperately to demonstrate the Bible as the infallible guide to the story of Creation, then succumbing without dignity to the pitiless goad of Clarence Darrow.