Re: Science teaching and religion: was Unorthodox science projects

[Chuck Britton <britton@NCSSM.EDU>]

There are no effective 'arguments' that address this science vs.
religion question but I will throw in my own personal 2 cents.

I had a childhood playmate whose uncle lived in Oak Ridge, TN. He was
in fact a Manhattan Project nuclear physicist, as I learned later.
When I had the chance to actually meet him briefly, I was only
vaguely amused that he was also a freshly minted Episcopal priest.
William Pollard was quite an active voice in the Oak Ridge community
- but I'm not aware of much that has been written about him.


At 1:31 AM -0400 4/25/04, Hugh Logan wrote:
> Fernanda Foertter [Advanced Physics Forums] wrote:
> >  oh...this is my favorite argument theologists make.
> >
> >  "But scientist so-and-so believed in god and that didn't ditract from
> >  science!"
> >
> >  Yes is does.  It's a poor argument to say the least.
>
> Since you quoted my message, I hope you didn't think I was making that
> argument. I was just giving the chemistry professor as an example of the
> extremes to which combining science teaching with religion could be
> taken. I said that this, at the least, limited the areas of science that
> could be taught to his students. Also, I don't think his extreme
> authoritarian attitude is conducive to science. However, I wanted to
> give him credit for his substantial academic achievements. Not all
> fundamentalists have such credentials. I don't know him or anything
> about him other than what is on that web site. I was trying to be
> respectful to his college, which did not treat me very well, saying what
> good I could say about it. The achievements of students that I referred
> to happened before he arrived. I presume the teachers there are
> Christians, but I never heard them talk much about religion after the
> initial interview. Although I was told in writing in advance that there
> was no expectation that the position would be for more than one year, I
> worked hard as the only physics teacher there. There was practically no
> help with the laboratory, which meant I was often there after midnight
> getting the equipment working or writing the computer configuration
> files, after which I had to prepare for classes and grade homework --
> not like having TA's to do it. It was very expensive to move from
> Massachusetts to Waynesburg and back, furnishing an apartment at
> considerable expense and having to sell the furnishings for about 1/6 of
> what I paid for them after ten months. I had hoped that I could stay
> there an extra year. One cannot pick and choose college teaching
> positions without a Ph.D. As long as they did not interfere with my
> academic freedom, I thought I could get along with them. When they
> couldn't find someone by Aug. 1998, they advertised for a temporary
> replacement. As soon as I accepted the position, they reopened the
> search for a permanent physics teacher. They found the Ph.D. candidate
> they wanted. So I was only trying to be respectful if they happened to
> see my message.
>
> However, I think the history of science does show that some scientists
> were motivated by their religion. I do know of some great physicists and
> physics teachers that were religious -- still others that were
> respectful of religion even if they were not religious themselves. But
> stating this is not a theological argument.
>
> H.L.


--
I never teach my pupils; I only attempt  to provide the conditions in
which they can learn.
 - Albert Einstein