The arguments between religion
and science were what largely stuck out for me in this article. Although there
is one instance in particular that grabbed my attention, this theme ran through
a large part of Pinker’s piece and is prevalent in several scientific debates.
On page 5 Pinker says that “Many people are sorry to “lose God” when they hear
of these findings, or at least sorry to lose the values that have traditionally
been associated with God.”
First
off, I just want to clarify that I’m not arguing with this statement. There isn’t
any way to debate that people who believe in some sort of spirituality are
constantly faced with some sort of battle against their beliefs and what science
holds true. With my own eyes I have seen people who were very devout in their
faith, denounce their God and strike out for a path of science. Whatever my
feelings are aside, the line between religion and science is something that
people on both sides have to face eventually.
Secondly, I am not in any way arguing with factual science. If I read a
case study and something is effectively proven to be true, let’s say the age of
a rock for instance, I do not find it within myself, nor do I wish it there, to
argue with the scientist about the age of that rock. It is the same for me as arguing
that there is Nitrogen in our atmosphere.
With
both of those said, this line raises extreme agitation in me, not against
Pinker though. I was brought up in a
Christian household and as I’ve grown older I’ve chosen my own beliefs. While I
have always had family around that held the same beliefs, the same cannot be
said for friends and peers in the academic world. This situation has led to me being constantly
challenged on my beliefs and how they fit into the world of science. People
almost always assume that because I do hold Christian beliefs, that I disagree
with scientific views and we must be at odds. It is increasingly irritating
that people assume that I am ignorant simply because of my beliefs.
This
line struck such a cord in me because I wish that religion and science could
find ways to work together and not constantly be at war. It is eternally
frustrating that people with any sort of religious beliefs are looked at as
ignorant and willfully uneducated. On the flip side it irritates me when people
of a religious nature write scientists off as heretics and claim they’re only
goal is to disprove God. As with
anything, I think that more productive things could be accomplished if these
two groups could stop bullying each other and work together towards greater
knowledge in both areas.
I completely agree and related to what you had to say. I too was raised in a Christian household, chose my own beliefs, and struggle with people (especially "science-y" ones) who constantly tell me and even get angry with me, telling me that because I believe in God, I am a threat to science. One of the things that Pinker said that I don't know if I agree with was "Today, no scientifically literate person can believe that the events narrated in Genesis actually took place"(1). I feel like that is a bit of a sweeping remark that shouldn't be so easily read over...
ReplyDeleteI actually really like this post. I can’t totally relate to it since I’m not religious, but I can say that one of the people I look up to the most in my lab is pretty Christian. He’s taught me so much, and like you, I would get really ticked if someone started saying that he couldn’t possibly be a good scientist since he’s religious. After saying this, I realize that my lab isn’t in an area of science that is traditionally viewed as “conflicting” with religion, so maybe that wasn’t the best example. I am curious though about how religious people in an area like evolutionary biology find a way to reconcile the two “opposing” sides of their lives. Also, I was wondering if you could maybe explain a little more (if you read this comment) about what you mean by science and religion working together towards greater knowledge in both areas? It sounds super cool, but I’m sort of confused about how science could advance religious knowledge and vice versa.
ReplyDeleteWell first I'll respond to emann, that quote also really bothered me and I debated whether or not to respond to that one instead. I chose however to ignore it because it riled me up a bit more than the one I wrote about. That quote did tie into my point though because I felt that it insinuated that people who believe in Creation must be illiterate and therefore stupid. I consider myself a decently smart person and I'm fairly open to new ideas so I was absolutely offended.
ReplyDeleteNow to Julian, this is off topic but what is your area of science? I missed the first day of class, so if there were any sort of introductions I'm in the grey area there. As far as evolutionary biology, I'll choose a pretty basic subject, although it's not technically evolutionary. A lot of Christians, struggle to accept aging techniques used for the Earth and other rocks. For me this is simple, God made the world. And however he did it is his business. While we are taught that the world was created in 7 days, days is a relative term to us that doesn't have any actual meaning to creation. One of those could be millions of years, one of them could be an hour. As far as I'm concerned it's pretty presumptuous of people to think that they know all of what was God's plan because someone translated something of of Greek and chose the word day. I believe that as humans we were given the ability to discover and grow in our knowledge and that God encourages science. This is actually a decent example for science and religion working together. The aging tools that are available to us are phenomenal, why not see if we can actually figure out how long the Creation was? Or using science to find lost Biblical artifacts? It's hard to specify since they've so long been at opposition but I'm sure lots of new areas could be opened up.
ReplyDeleteAwesome, that makes a lot more sense--thanks for including those details!
DeleteAnd I'm in organic chemistry. I (try to) make molecules like drugs from really simple building blocks. Think Legos!
This is a very interesting post indeed and I'm glad this issue was addressed. I myself am not religious, nor are any members of my immediate family. Growing up in Minneapolis, none of my friends were particularly religious (with the exception of a few Unitarians) either. I have always noticed a tendency in those who are without system of faith to, as you said, write off people with religious beliefs as ignorant of and/or threatened by science. The cartoon at the top of your post was spot on.
ReplyDeleteAddressing what emann said - with regards to a "scientifically literate person" believing that the events in the book of Genesis took place, Pinker is simply that what science has told us about the natural process could not allow for the heavens, the entire earth and everything on it as we know it today to have been created over the course of seven days. The sections of the Bible that I have read - done for the sake of my own curiosity - I personally tend to interpret more allegorically than literally. This is where the science/religion 'wars' encounter their rub. People on the science side stereotype people of faith as not believing in science because the loudest voice in the shouting match is from the Evangelical (read: extreme) Christian-right. These people DO NOT read the Bible allegorically - they read it literally.
To wrap this up, I guess I'm kind of in the camp that believes that the 7 days of Genesis could represent the temporal process of the formation of the earth (the Big Bang, evolution from single to multi-celled organisms, etc.) - much like Esther discusses in her last comment. "I believe that as humans we were given the ability to discover and grow in our knowledge and that God encourages science." This is so great! If we were in fact endowed with the level of intelligence that we have by a high creator, then wouldn't it be almost blasphemous to discourage the use of God's gift? Very interesting, indeed!