Francis Collins is interviewed in Christianity Today [Creation or Evolution? Yes!: Francis Collins issues a call to stand on the middle ground].
I'm eagerly waiting for all the appeasers to attack Collins for not being an expert on religion. Meanwhile PZ Myers invites us to take a whack at the worst parts of the interview [Collins in Christianity Today]. Here's my contribution ...
One of the main reasons I wrote The Language of God was to try to put forward a comfortable synthesis of what science teaches us about the natural world and what faith teaches us about God. Yet it seems to be a pretty well kept secret these days that the scientific approach and the spiritual approach are compatible.It used to be a well-kept secret when the believers dominated the discussion. But now the cat's out of the bag. Science and religion are at war and only one of them is going to emerge victorious.
I think we've allowed for too long extreme voices to dominate the stage in a way that has led many people to assume that's all there is.Repeat after me ..
ATHEISM IS NOT AN EXTREME VOICEIt only seems that way to believers because they can't conceive of anyone not believing in God. But, in fact, almost everyone rejects 99.99% of all Gods. Atheists just go one God further. It's really not that much of a stretch.
The thesis of my book is that there is no need for this battle. In fact, it's a destructive battle. And we as a society would be well served to recover that happy middle ground where people have been for most of human history.There is no middle ground between belief and non-belief, or between rationalism and superstition. You can't occupy something that doesn't exist.
7 comments :
"Science and religion are at war and only one of them is going to emerge victorious."
Yes, one of them would emerge victorious, and I'm afraid that it would not be science. At the beginning of the 20th Century, how many people predicted the revival of religious fundamentalism by the end of that century? I would doubt that many scientists, atheists, and rationalists did.
Do you really think that Abrahamic monotheism, which over the last 3,000 years has spread throughout the planet, hybridized, mutated, and adapted to local niches, is going to disappear?
This particular war should be called off.
(By the way, I am an atheist.)
Collins is worried that a conflict between faith and science can be troubling for youngsters. Let's explore why this is so:
1) Their religion has taught them stupid things that conflict with science.
2) Their religion has taught them that atheists cannot be moral.
3) Their religion has taught them that atheists have no purpose in their life (as opposed to being Yahweh's puppet).
4) Their religion has taught them that if they lose their faith, they will roast for eternity in the fires of hell.*
Therefore, the degree of trauma accompanying the possibility of loss of faith is all caused by this emotional blackmail and psychological terrorism of some brands of religion, most notably those who place stock in salvation by faith. And yet, Collins bends over backwards, making every excuse possible (and then some) for religion.
* Yes, once they abandon their faith, the fires of hell shouldn't be a concern, but this raises the activation barrier.
"But, in fact, almost everyone rejects 99.99% of all Gods."
Yes, yes ... that particular cutesy expression has been beaten to death by now. Give it a rest. It's one of Dawkin's sillier pronouncements, and I find that the mindless repeating of it is getting annoying.
It's irrelevant. Most scientific hypotheses have been rejected by now. (Phlogiston, anyone??) Who cares?
Scott, just out of curiosity, which of the major Gods are you equating with Phlogiston? Would that be the God of Abraham, or Jesus, or Vishnu, or Gitchi Manitou, or Amaterasu?
Do you reject all of them or just most of them? If it's not all, can you explain why you don't believe in the others and why those arguments don't apply to your god?
BTW, I'm much sillier than Richard Dawkins because I've been using this powerful argument for decades.
It's irrelevant. Most scientific hypotheses have been rejected by now. (Phlogiston, anyone??) Who cares?
And we have clear data that allows to reasonably declare them false. We don't have any clear data that indicates that the Christian god is any more likely to exist than Poseidon or Zeus.
At the risk of beating a dead horse, I couldn't resist giving the Collins interview a good bashing at my blog as well.
The more the merrier, huh?
;-)
"Atheism is not an extreme voice"
Point taken, but Anti-Theism is. One can easily believe in religion and in everything that science teaches.
-Just some guy
Post a Comment