Tuesday, November 21, 2006

Science Stands Up To Religion

You never would have heard them even a year or two ago but scientists are now standing up to one has called "the long nightmare of religious belief."

The rise of the religious right has been marked by outbreaks of anger from creationists seeking to suppress evolutionists. In US courts the evolutionists managed to prevail - just. Now, after taking this battering, science leaders are fighting back. This article from the New York Times shows how the fight is going:

"Maybe the pivotal moment came when Steven Weinberg, a Nobel laureate in physics, warned that “the world needs to wake up from its long nightmare of religious belief,” or when a Nobelist in chemistry, Sir Harold Kroto, called for the John Templeton Foundation to give its next $1.5 million prize for “progress in spiritual discoveries” to an atheist — Richard Dawkins, the Oxford evolutionary biologist whose book “The God Delusion” is a national best-seller.

Or perhaps the turning point occurred at a more solemn moment, when Neil deGrasse Tyson, director of the Hayden Planetarium in New York City and an adviser to the Bush administration on space exploration, hushed the audience with heartbreaking photographs of newborns misshapen by birth defects — testimony, he suggested, that blind nature, not an intelligent overseer, is in control.

Somewhere along the way, a forum this month at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in La Jolla, Calif., which might have been one more polite dialogue between science and religion, began to resemble the founding convention for a political party built on a single plank: in a world dangerously charged with ideology, science needs to take on an evangelical role, vying with religion as teller of the greatest story ever told.

After enduring two days of talks in which the Templeton Foundation came under the gun as smudging the line between science and faith, Charles L. Harper Jr., its senior vice president, lashed back, denouncing what he called “pop conflict books” like Dr. Dawkins’s “God Delusion,” as “commercialized ideological scientism” — promoting for profit the philosophy that science has a monopoly on truth.

That brought an angry rejoinder from Richard P. Sloan, a professor of behavioral medicine at Columbia University Medical Center, who said his own book, “Blind Faith: The Unholy Alliance of Religion and Medicine,” was written to counter “garbage research” financed by Templeton on, for example, the healing effects of prayer.

With atheists and agnostics outnumbering the faithful (a few believing scientists, like Francis S. Collins, author of “The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief,” were invited but could not attend), one speaker after another called on their colleagues to be less timid in challenging teachings about nature based only on scripture and belief. “The core of science is not a mathematical model; it is intellectual honesty,” said Sam Harris, a doctoral student in neuroscience and the author of “The End of Faith: Religion, Terror and the Future of Reason” and “Letter to a Christian Nation.”

“Every religion is making claims about the way the world is,” he said. “These are claims about the divine origin of certain books, about the virgin birth of certain people, about the survival of the human personality after death. These claims purport to be about reality.”

By shying away from questioning people’s deeply felt beliefs, even the skeptics, Mr. Harris said, are providing safe harbor for ideas that are at best mistaken and at worst dangerous. “I don’t know how many more engineers and architects need to fly planes into our buildings before we realize that this is not merely a matter of lack of education or economic despair,” he said."

Before you start posting angry comments, I'm very much struggling in the middle of this one. My mind is anything but made up. That said, I have difficulty grasping the fury of those who contend for bibilical inerrancy. At least I'm trying to work my way through it.

2 comments:

  1. I do not understand why you struggle? I do not understand what people 'get' out of faith. Is it the ceremony? Is it the feeling that you are being protected? Religions grew from myths that were concocted to explain the aspects of the world that were not understood. As we came to understand more and more of the world, somehow we did not abondon the old beliefs. We found ways for them to co-exist. People want both MRIs and miracles, but we can not have it both ways. We need to choose. The cold hard reality of the world described by science or the bronze age myths of an all powerful God. Anything else is the worst kind of fence sitting.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I understand your point, I really do. My problem lies in upbringing, I suppose, and many decades of believing myself to be a Christian. Then there's the whole alpha-omega quandry. I'm not even sure that human intelligence is capable of grasping the issue much less resolving it.

    ReplyDelete