Article: Religion and Science

ABE: Sorry, I should have addressed this directly to Tim.I think your philosophical objectives as stated are noble ones, but I am a bit tentative about their practical application. For example there are many instances when religious and scientific teachings clearly conflict in what they explicitly or implicitly proscribe for humanity. These do not constitute simply a lack of mutual understanding on some issue, but rather diametrically opposed implications for humanity. I'll take one of my favorite examples. The global overpopulation problem. Most ecologists agree we are destroying the planet and the only stabilizing solution is to reduce our population growth. Since I am an ecological entomologist I strongly concur with this analysis because I am all to familiar with the data on which it is based. So along comes Faith, for example, and says to me, you are clearly wrong because the Bible told us to "go forth and multiply". How can this conflict be resolved through any dialogue between the two communities. Viewed from a scientific perspective, it boils down to exactly what Jar commented. How much ignorance and missinformation propagated by religion can be 'tolerated' by science?This message has been edited by EZscience, 06-21-2005 03:55 PM

OK Tim. I read your OP twice. I agree with all the philosophical theory. More dialogue should, in theory, lead to more understanding and "religious scientists might serve as bidirectional ambassadors between the two communities". I agree that would be constructive, but it's not likely to happen given the level of mistrust of science that the religious LEADERS (yes, those whom you credit with intellect approaching that of scientists) intentionally progagate to shore up their own fragile constructs of reality. Isn't your proposition, in practice, pretty much a pipe dream in the face of some of the most glaring conflicts (in terms of recommended human behavior) between science and religion? I want details on how such a dialogue could conceivably resolve a specific a conflict such as the one I presented - overpopulation. I think both sides could talk for years on that one and never come to a consensus. I admire your optimism, but isn't it a little far-fetched?

That is a perfectly valid distinction Jar. I stand corrected. However, to all us atheists at least, I think it seems highly apparent that most of the 'willfully ignorant' in this regard have strongly theistic motivations for preserving their ignorance (which is fine) and foisting it on others (which is not).

Actually Faith, I think you are making a case for religious tyranny, at least at the familial level. You are arguing for the right to indoctrinate children because they are your own. I guess there is no way to stop someone or some school from doing that, but it doesn't make it right or the best thing to do for the children.Both my parents were raised catholic, but before I was born, my mother switched to protestantism and my father to atheism. You might think this made for a lot of conflicts around education but it didn't. My mother used to teach me some bible readings (when I was 6-7 years old), but I was taught *about* the bible, but not dogmatically as if it were the exclusive source of all truth. My father the atheist, on the other hand, never tried to influence my beliefs one way or the other. He simply said, you have to make up your own mind what you believe in and what you don't.The point is, I think my fathers approach is the correct one. I don't think we should try and convince our children to believe in any specific faith or dogma. We can certainly teach them *about* the nature of religion, even specifically about a particular religion we might personally espouse, but we should encourage them to make up their own mind about it instead of trying to brainwash them to believe exactly what we do. This is the approach I take with my own daughters. I will express my opinions, certainly, but I encourage them to approach everything with an open mind and decide for themselves.ABE: Actually, when my eldest expressed a curiosity about church, I encouraged her to attend a few services with her mother to see what it was like. So you see we atheists are not all about trying to prevent children's access or exposure to religion, unlike the fundies, most of whom are adamant that children *not* be exposed to evolution.This message has been edited by EZscience, 06-23-2005 03:38 PM