Faith and Reason
Today’s New York Times featured an excellent article concerning the “brewing” conflict between science and religion, and the suggestion among leading scientific figures of a new kind of evangelization of science. In reality, it is a “war” as old as Galileo and the Church, but brought once again into the news cycles by a polemic written by famed evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins.
I had the pleasure of seeing Mr. Dawkins speak recently, in promotion of his new book, and I have to say I was genuinely impressed. I was impressed by his convictions, his iconoclast style and the presentation of his arguments. I haven’t read the The God Delusion yet, but I will certainly pick it up at some point.
While my own personal religious beliefs hang somewhere between Deism, the Hindu idea of Thou Art That, and Agnosticism, I certainly see and, to some degree, accept much of the scientific criticism of religion. However, the real issue at stake here is the role of science and religion in the public sphere and in modern society as a whole.
Dawkins and his colleagues at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies forum on religion need to recognize a point that Dr. Lawrence Krass made, which is “The Earth isn’t 6,000 years old [and] The Kennewick man was not a Umatilla Indian,” but the pursuit of scientific truth and the belief in an ordered universe, with a higher power are not mutually exclusive.
Yes, even the least sophisticated student of history can recognize the ideological conflicts that religion has caused. Yes, religion claims a dangerous monopoly on truth, often incompatible with modern liberalism. And yes, from a certain point of view, Mr Dawkins is correct that the religious education of a child does actually amount to a sort of indoctrination.
However, science has already claimed victory after victory in moving religion, particularly Christianity, towards a more tolerant and enlightened form. The literal belief in the Biblical creation stories has been on the decline since the Voltaire and the Age of Reason, the Reformation has smashed the ability of a hierarchical clerical power to meddle in political and social affairs, and the idea of Earth as the center of the Universe has been destroyed by mathematics and astronomy. The Earth has been shown to be billions of years old, the galaxy has been revealed to be an mind-bogglingly expansive place, of which the Earth is bit an insignificant speck.
Above all, Richard Dawkins, who is an evolutionary biologist, should realize that religion too has evolved to suit the needs of society and society has evolved to suit the needs of religion. And it will continue to evolve, often in tandem, sometimes gradually, and sometimes by simply being dragged by overwhelming force of evidence. Yes, it is frustrating to watch lawsuits attempting to stop the teaching of evolution and sound sience and replace it with some pseudo-philosophical objection. But science must confront theology respectfully and vigorously, and mind the fact that the overwhelming majority of human beings subscribe to, and have faith in, a greater being than themselves. That is the hallmark of progressive, enlightened, rational liberalism.
The New York Times – A Free For All On Science and Religion
I had the pleasure of seeing Mr. Dawkins speak recently, in promotion of his new book, and I have to say I was genuinely impressed. I was impressed by his convictions, his iconoclast style and the presentation of his arguments. I haven’t read the The God Delusion yet, but I will certainly pick it up at some point.
While my own personal religious beliefs hang somewhere between Deism, the Hindu idea of Thou Art That, and Agnosticism, I certainly see and, to some degree, accept much of the scientific criticism of religion. However, the real issue at stake here is the role of science and religion in the public sphere and in modern society as a whole.
Dawkins and his colleagues at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies forum on religion need to recognize a point that Dr. Lawrence Krass made, which is “The Earth isn’t 6,000 years old [and] The Kennewick man was not a Umatilla Indian,” but the pursuit of scientific truth and the belief in an ordered universe, with a higher power are not mutually exclusive.
Yes, even the least sophisticated student of history can recognize the ideological conflicts that religion has caused. Yes, religion claims a dangerous monopoly on truth, often incompatible with modern liberalism. And yes, from a certain point of view, Mr Dawkins is correct that the religious education of a child does actually amount to a sort of indoctrination.
However, science has already claimed victory after victory in moving religion, particularly Christianity, towards a more tolerant and enlightened form. The literal belief in the Biblical creation stories has been on the decline since the Voltaire and the Age of Reason, the Reformation has smashed the ability of a hierarchical clerical power to meddle in political and social affairs, and the idea of Earth as the center of the Universe has been destroyed by mathematics and astronomy. The Earth has been shown to be billions of years old, the galaxy has been revealed to be an mind-bogglingly expansive place, of which the Earth is bit an insignificant speck.
Above all, Richard Dawkins, who is an evolutionary biologist, should realize that religion too has evolved to suit the needs of society and society has evolved to suit the needs of religion. And it will continue to evolve, often in tandem, sometimes gradually, and sometimes by simply being dragged by overwhelming force of evidence. Yes, it is frustrating to watch lawsuits attempting to stop the teaching of evolution and sound sience and replace it with some pseudo-philosophical objection. But science must confront theology respectfully and vigorously, and mind the fact that the overwhelming majority of human beings subscribe to, and have faith in, a greater being than themselves. That is the hallmark of progressive, enlightened, rational liberalism.
The New York Times – A Free For All On Science and Religion
