Intellectual Two Face??

From the NYtimes, the story of a grad student who's just finished his dissertation in geosciences from the University of Rhode Island. The problem? He endorses Intellegent Design:


"For him, Dr. Ross said, the methods and theories of paleontology are one “paradigm” for studying the past, and Scripture is another. In the paleontological paradigm, he said, the dates in his dissertation are entirely appropriate. The fact that as a young earth creationist he has a different view just means, he said, “that I am separating the different paradigms.”
He likened his situation to that of a socialist studying economics in a department with a supply-side bent. “People hold all sorts of opinions different from the department in which they graduate,” he said. “What’s that to anybody else?”"

Opinion is one thing, emperical fact is another. I can't see how someone can hold on to a theory based on superstitution and at the same time hold onto the contrapositive scientific theory. It would seem to lead towards sometype of a intellectual schizophrenia. Now the question that the Times addresses is whether the intitution (in this case the Uni. of Rhode Island) should give him a degree since his personal beliefs run counter to the very paradigm of what he's studying. Their approach to this question though seems more political then intellectually honest. In other words, it's not whether he holds a diverging perspective, it's rather does his degree validate his religious beliefs? My answer? It's not up to the university to judge, and a student should not be denied the fruits of his work because of personal beliefs that run counter to the traditional foundation of his work. It would be like denying a person a PhD in American History because they believe Communism is the best system of government. If a person does the work (and from the article this guy's work within the school has been exemplary) within the correct framwork of the program and scientific discourse then he should recieve his degree. It has been the province of religion to silence and ostracize dissenting views. Academia should not engage in the same prejudice, even when the ideals run counter to the emperical view as long as the course work does not reflect that personal belief.