The New York Times continues their series on evolution, science, and religion today with an article discussing religious belief amongst scientists ("Scientists Speak Up on Mix of God and Science" by Cornelia Dean).
My beef with creationists and many in the intelligent design crowd is not that they believe in a supernatural being, it's that they're trying to force their religious (and therefore non-scientific) beliefs into science. Luckily, there are many scientists who understand the differences between science & religion:
Although they embrace religious faith, these scientists also embrace science as it has been defined for centuries. That is, they look to the natural world for explanations of what happens in the natural world and they recognize that scientific ideas must be provisional - capable of being overturned by evidence from experimentation and observation. This belief in science sets them apart from those who endorse creationism or its doctrinal cousin, intelligent design, both of which depend on the existence of a supernatural force.Their belief in God challenges scientists who regard religious belief as little more than magical thinking, as some do. Their faith also challenges believers who denounce science as a godless enterprise and scientists as secular elitists contemptuous of God-fearing people.
Some scientists say simply that science and religion are two separate realms, "nonoverlapping magisteria," as the late evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould put it in his book "Rocks of Ages" (Ballantine, 1999). In Dr. Gould's view, science speaks with authority in the realm of "what the universe is made of (fact) and why does it work this way (theory)" and religion holds sway over "questions of ultimate meaning and moral value."
Another crucial piece about the religious beliefs of many scientists is the extent to which they think any god interacts with the universe:
He rejects the idea that scientists who reject religion are arrogant. "We know how many mistakes we've made," Dr. Weinberg said. And he is angered by assertions that people without religious faith are without a moral compass.Posted by Tom Nugent at August 23, 2005 01:40 PMIn any event, he added, "the experience of being a scientist makes religion seem fairly irrelevant," he said. "Most scientists I know simply don't think about it very much. They don't think about religion enough to qualify as practicing atheists."
Most scientists he knows who do believe in God, he added, believe in "a God who is behind the laws of nature but who is not intervening."
In any event, he added, "the experience of being a scientist makes religion seem fairly irrelevant," he said. "Most scientists I know simply don't think about it very much. They don't think about religion enough to qualify as practicing atheists."
That part quote alone sounds .. arrogant? The rest of it might well apply to most of us. Who has time to think about God stuff? Battlestar Galactica is on.
Posted by: Brian at August 23, 2005 04:16 PMI had the opportunity to read Gould's work, and specifically his discussion on "nonoverlapping magisteria". Gould was an elegant writer.
As time goes on, I see more and more that we are seeing history playing out: no battle or war was ever fought over religion: it was fought over who would control resources, geography, and power. I think today's comment by President Pat Robertson reaffirms that belief when he stated that he got George Bush elected; all but claiming that he was pullling the strings in he nation(not realistic ... but ...). Pat Robertson is not about religion. He is about power.
When you want power, you have to knock out the biggest kids on the block. That is why terrorists attack the United States and not other countries more responsible for their condition, and that is why the Pat Robertsons of the world attack science.
But Brian: Who has time to think about God?:
"God has a plan for everyone .... even you, Baltar."
--Number Six
"God didn't create the Cylons. We did"
--Commander Adama
no battle or war was ever fought over religion: it was fought over who would control resources, geography, and power.
Mabye. I think that, to the folks in Europe during the Reformation, what you call power and faith were bound up within each other. Holy Mother Church was a power and faith wrapped in one big package. We might say (and think) that power and religion are seperate issues; the Reformation is responsible for that mode of thinking. Your averge European in the 15th century would not understand it.
Pat Robertson is not about religion. He is about power.
Pat Robertson is a nut. Um, that sounds better in my head when I say it in my now fading Okie drawl . . .
But Brian: Who has time to think about God?:
I knew you'd get the BSG reference. 8).