On the Front Lines of the Culture Wars

On the Front Lines of the Culture Wars


Scientists tell pollsters religion and science not irreconcilable

Are there irreconcilable differences between faith and science? Not in the opinion of prominent scientists who participated in a five-year study by Rice University.

Researchers there found that only a minority of scientists questioned at major research universities say that religion and science required distinct boundaries.

“When it comes to questions about the meaning of life, ways of understanding reality, origins of Earth and how life developed on it, many have seen religion and science as being at odds and even in irreconcilable conflict,” says Rice sociologist Elaine Howard Ecklund.

On the contrary, a majority of the scientists interviewed said they view both religion and science as “valid avenues of knowledge” that can bring broader understanding to important questions, says Ecklund.

She summarizes her findings in “Scientists Negotiate Boundaries Between Religion and Science,” in the September issue of the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. Her co-authors are sociologists Jerry Park of Baylor University and Katherine Sorrell, a former postbaccalaureate fellow at Rice and current Ph.D. student at the University of Notre Dame.

They interviewed a scientifically selected sample of 275 participants, pulled from a survey of 2,198 tenured and tenure-track faculty in the natural and social sciences at 21 elite U.S. research universities. Only 15 percent of those surveyed said they view religion and science as always in conflict. Another 15 percent said the two are never in conflict, while 70 percent said they believe religion and science are only sometimes in conflict.

Approximately half of the original survey population expressed some form of religious identity, whereas the other half did not, according to Ecklund, who is the author of Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really Think,published by Oxford University Press last year.

The study was supported by a grant from the John Templeton Foundation with additional funding from Rice University.

“Much of the public believes that as science becomes more prominent, secularization increases and religion decreases,” she says. “Findings like these among elite scientists, who many individuals believe are most likely to be secular in their beliefs, definitely call into question ideas about the relationship between secularization and science.”

Many of those surveyed cited issues in the public realm (teaching of creationism versus evolution, stem cell research) as reasons for believing there is conflict between the two. The study showed that these individuals generally have a particular kind of religion in mind (and religious people and institutions) when they say that religion and science are in conflict.

Other findings in the study: 

Scientists as a whole are substantially different from the American public in how they view teaching “intelligent design” in public schools. Nearly all of the scientists – religious and nonreligious alike – have a negative impression of the theory of intelligent design.

Sixty-eight percent of scientists surveyed consider themselves spiritual to some degree.

Scientists who view themselves as spiritual/religious are less likely to see religion and science in conflict.

Overall, under some circumstances even the most religious of scientists were described in very positive terms by their nonreligious peers; this suggests that the integration of religion and science is not so distasteful to all scientists.



Advertisement
Comments read comments(3)
post a comment
Robert Landbeck

posted September 25, 2011 at 1:27 pm


Personally I think there is a great deal of disingenuous political correctness incorporated into these findings. Science and religion are not reconcilable in principle until a religious conception exists that is open to direct cause and effect, evidence based scrutiny. That is when religion can offer demonstrable proof of God, testable by faith, and confirmed by that same reality. Then we shall know the truth and the truth will set us free us from our own ignorance and prejudice!



report abuse
 

kenneth

posted September 25, 2011 at 11:52 pm


As a scientist, I will say there is no inherent conflict between science and religion, PROVIDED that they each operate within their own areas of competence. Science is about describing observable and testable phenomena of the universe. It has nothing to offer in terms of answering “meaning of life” questions, and is disingenuous when it tries. Likewise when religion attempts to pose as science. Intelligent design will always lead to conflict because it pretends to be science while rejecting all of its tools and the very premise of science itself.



report abuse
 

Tim Aldred

posted January 27, 2012 at 11:40 am


The finding is very confusing and unedifying, because it lacks foundation in knowledge of realistic human-life cosmogony. The origin of religion has nothing intelligible in it. If homo sapiens came from unknowing origin then we can speculate about the world all we want, but there’s a history which gives humanity enlightenment on how we came to be here, and that governs jurisdiction over out thoughts of the world. The finding is therefore depressingly unacceptable.



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

President Obama fails key test for Antichrists: confesses Jesus is Lord
President Barack Obama passed a key test Monday night in case anybody is worried that he is the Antichrist. Speaking at a campaign fundraiser at the House of Blues in Los Angeles, Obama was interrupted by a man identified as David Serrano who repeatedly yelled that "Jesus is God." As Se

posted 7:53:12pm Sep. 28, 2011 | read full post »

Michael Moore: America would welcome a fat president such as Chris Christie
Asked by Joy Behar onHeadline News whether America would vote for a "fat" candidate for President, controversial film-maker Michael Moore, who has never been accused of being too skinny, responded that most of America is fat and would probably identify with an overweight Commander-in-Chief. Histo

posted 10:27:30am Sep. 28, 2011 | read full post »

ACLU, Planned Parenthood combine to fight Mississippi constitutional amendment
Planned Parenthood and the American Civil Liberties Union have joined forces to create the pro-abortion “Mississippians for Healthy Families” with a goal of defeating a constitutional amendment limiting abortion in the Magnolia State. Christine Dhanagom of LifeSiteNews writes that "Yes on

posted 11:55:16am Sep. 27, 2011 | read full post »

Wikileaks: U.S. Embassy criticized Catholic influences on Poland
U.S. Embassy officials in Warsaw, Poland, under the Obama administration complained that Catholic Church doctrine is a major source of “homophobia” in the heavily Catholic country, according to diplomatic cables released by Wikileaks. The messages from the American embassy in Poland's capit

posted 3:51:00pm Sep. 08, 2011 | read full post »

Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus on National Cathedral's 9/11 program, but no evangelicals
The National Cathedral in Washington, D.C., has scheduled “A Call to Compassion” interfaith prayer vigil on Sept. 11 -- however not a single protestant or evangelical has been invited to participate. Who was invited? A Roman Catholic bishop, a Jewish rabbi, Buddhist nun, a Hindu priest, the

posted 7:27:00am Sep. 08, 2011 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.