SCIENCE AND RELIGION: HOW GREAT IS THE DIVIDE?

1. SCIENCE AND RELIGION:HOW GREAT IS THE DIVIDE?

2. WARFARE THESIS: Throughout history, religion and science have been opposed to each other. Further, religion has stymied science. According to Lawrence Principe,* “No serious historians of science or of the science-religion issue today maintain the ‘warfare thesis’.”*Professor, History of Science and Technology and Chemistry, Johns Hopkins University

3. How did the “warfare thesis” originate?

4. John William Draper wrote A History of the Conflict between Religion and Science in 1874. Though it remains readily available, the facts are twisted: “The text is actually one long, vitriolic, anti-Catholic diatribe.”

5. Another author, Andrew Dickson White, popularized the notion that before Columbus and Magellan, the world was thought to be flat and that the Earth’s sphericity was officially opposed by the Catholic church…likewise “baseless”.

6. Nonetheless, these authors’ influence has been embraced ever since.

7. St. Augustine(354-430 CE) • Created fundamental statements concerning the relationship between faith and reason and the correct methods of biblical interpretation • Still widely read today The most important figure in the ancient Western Church; over 5 million of his words survive

8. We cannot sweep seeming contradictions between nature and the Bible under the rug; we must resolve them intellectually • We both “hear” the word (through the Bible) and “see” the word (in nature) • It is more difficult to interpret the Bible than nature St. Augustine

9. Biblical expressions were accommodated to the understandings of their original audience • Thus, some passages must be considered “conjecture” • Our interpretations of biblical passages must be informed by the current state of sure scientific knowledge St. Augustine

10. Knowledge of the natural world both reveals the majesty of God’s creation and is indispensable for correct biblical interpretation • Far be it from us to negate the one faculty God gave us: reason • Simple faith without exercise of reason is condemned; “blind faith” is explicitly rejected St. Augustine

11. Later Thinking

12. In the 17th century, clerics (church leaders) were convinced that scientific discoveries would provide the BEST support for religious belief

13. Robert Boyle (1627-1691): Used scientific discoveries to argue AGAINST atheism • Sir Isaac Newton (1642-1727) was deeply religious; he freely discussed the activities of God • Bentley argued that the structure of the Solar System was evidence of “divine design” and its continued stability as evidence of God’s continued activity

14. Why was Bentley’s argument problematic?

15. Every time science can explain a previously inexplicable phenomenon, by suggesting divine intervention theologians create an unsuitable “God of the gaps”. • Such gaps tend to close with the advance of scientific knowledge, thus putting religion in the position of constant retreat. “God” is progressively squeezed out of the picture. • However, such “retreat” depends on the choice to create and rely on “God of the gaps” arguments.

16. It is possible that some gaps can never be closed; but, historically speaking, these are few in comparison to the many proposed since the 17th century.

17. A watch may imply a master watchmaker, but it can also imply a company of watchmakers – far from concept of a singular Christian God • Makes God a “mechanic” (without moral force, etc.) • Raises question: Is design real or illusion? No possibility of comparing a designed vs. an undesigned universe. OTHER PROBLEMS

18. Two Basic Tenets • Intelligent causes (i.e., “creator”) have a crucial role in the origin and design of the universe and of life and its diversity. • Design is detectable in nature. INTELLIGENT DESIGN

19. Critics identify intelligent design as a thinly veiled offensive by evangelical/fundamentalist Christians to insert particular belief systems into scientific and educational establishments.

20. The fact that Intelligent Design is argued for primarily in the courts of law and public opinion rather than in appropriate scientific circles seems to support this contention. Science goes beyond the legal system or public opinion.

21. Are we not forever incapable of explaining “natural causes”? How do we differentiate between what we willbe able to explain and what we will never be able to?

22. That is, primary causation is by its very nature incomprehensible.If there’s a creator, who created the creator?Or, we’re left with a “miracle”.

23. Even medieval (5th – 16th centuries) theologians gravitated toward “naturalism”: Natural forces alone explain the causation of phenomena.

24. Intelligent Design supporters depict scientists as atheists. Yet more than 40% of American scientists believe in a personal God and a larger percentage in a transcendent being.

25. And then – there’s the controversy over evolution!

26. Common ancestry – all species in existence today originate from a single ancient organism or a very small number of organisms. • Species variations come about randomly. • Natural selection is the mechanism for speciation: Useful variations promote survival and are thus passed on to the next generations. 3 Important Features of Evolution

27. Can’t invoke “divine intervention” if species evolve through random variations and natural selection. A nature run by violent, brutal natural selection could not witness a merciful, benevolent God. The Argument from “Design Perspective”

28. Liberal Theologians were anxious to distinguish themselves from conservatives who stuck to biblical literalism by supporting evolutionary theory. • Throughout the 20th century, there has been a tendency for less educated Protestants to assert and reinforce religious identity through opposition to evolution. BOTTOM LINE

29. Interestingly, while public schools and textbook publishers have shied away from addressing evolution at all, Catholic parochial schools are the most likely to teach it.In 1996, John Paul II declared it “more than a hypothesis”.

30. However, contrary to much mythology, religious leaders were significantly divided in their reception of Darwin. Both theologians and scientists were spread over the spectrum.

31. Many Christians saw evolution consistent with a “divine plan” and even as proof of a divine purpose in the world (“programmed” in by God from the beginning).

32. While most Americans tend to think of the controversy over evolution as long-standing, it is a relatively recent phenomenon. “The loudest combatants are both extremists.”

33. Fundamentalists do not have the right to speak for Christianity.Scientists such as Hitchens and Dawkins do not have the right to speak for science.

34. “Their arguments tend to harden positions and create divisions where none exist. The perception of controversy ignores the vast field of cooperation and intelligent conversation by the majority in between.”

35. These slides summarize the work of Professor Lawrence M. Principe, Johns Hopkins University.“Science and Religion” is an audio series produced by The Teaching Company in 2006.