Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] About the "why" and "how questins."

My comment, and the quote, had nothing to do with whether or not scientists were or are religious, or whether religious people were or are qualified to study science. Rather, it addresses the fact that religious views have little to say about the scientific enterprise and that science has little to say about religion. "Preachers doing science" refers to ID and creationism, where people pretend that their religious viewpoints are in some way connected to the practice of science. It's a sham. "Scientists preaching" refers to the idiotic notion that scientists can answer questions of religion. Science says nothing about why we are here in this universe, but some scientists (Hawking among them) pretend that science can answer that question. Not just arrogance, but in all honesty, a misunderstanding of what science is about.

As I have said in other posts, the way scientists should combat those who pretend that religion is science is to be honest about the science. We explain what theories are, and admit freely that they are theories and not fact (especially in the case of evolution). And the scientific community should not be silent when people like Hawking claim that science is somehow on the verge of knowing what God intended. Most of us, I hope, know that science does not address such questions.

Ignoring the ever-present evolution debate, much of the "high entanglement" you refer to is, I believe, mostly due to AGW. Scientists would not be in so deep in this entanglement if they simply presented facts and let up on the propaganda (dire predictions of catastrophe). When scientists exaggerate their case (and any objective observer has to agree that the case for AGW has been exaggerated in some circles), they lose the moral high ground. When the dire predictions fail to materialize, the public loses confidence.

So to go back to the quote, scientists should not preach. But they do.

Submitted from an agnostic and a science educator.

Bill


On Dec 20, 2010, at 9:46 PM, John Clement wrote:


Don't know where this quote came from, but I love it. "I can remember
when preachers didn't do science and scientists didn't preach."


Let us not forget that Newton also wrote religious tracts, most of which are
totally forgotten today.

So pray tell when was that time?

After all Goethe invented the color wheel which is still used by artists,
despite the fact that it is fairly inaccurate. Newton had 7 colors in the
spectrum because of the numerology.

In the 1950s when I went to public school in upstate NY they had a prayer
and the pledge every day, but nobody questioned evolution. On the other
hand evolution was forbidden to be taught in some states in the 50s.
William Jennings Bryant was extremely anti-evolutionst, a liberal populist,
and known for his oratory. He came close to being president of the US.

I think there have been times of relatively less science/religion
entanglement, but now we are in a time of high entanglement. But there are
indications that the anti-evolutionist denominations are losing influence.
Actually some think we are headed towards a very pluralistic society similar
to the Roman Empire where extremely diverse religious groups will all be
included equally, and Christianity will no longer be as dominant.

Will this unentangle religion and science? The Japanese do not have such an
entanglement because they choose the various religious aspects they like for
each part of their life. So they have Shinto births, Christian weddings,
and Buddist funerals. The Pueblo Indians added Christianity to their
traditional beliefs, but did not give up their traditions.

But for now we have to be aware of the anti-science pressures that might be
used against us.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX


_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l