Comments on: NAS: Religion and Science are Compatible

By: Barbara Kline Pope

Barbara Kline Pope — Fri, 11 Jan 2008 10:57:26 +0000

Some people who are commenting on this blog may be doing so without having had the opportunity to read our book, “Science, Evolution, and Creationism.” This conversation might be enhanced and clarified by reading the book online or downloading it in pdf for free at http://www.nap.edu/sec.

By: salient

salient — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 19:31:39 +0000

I’m not defending any claims that religion might make for being anything beyond an emotionally comforting mythology.However, people such as Ken Miller are able to reconcile science with elements of religion. This suggests that there are many more people who will never quit religion but who might learn to accept science.

By: Marcus Ranum

Marcus Ranum — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 18:49:33 +0000

Science is compatible with faith the same way a rifle bullet is compatible with a melon.

By: Tex

Tex — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 22:45:41 +0000

The only way science and religion can be compatible is if the definitions of them are greatly distorted. Science uses empirical evidence to build a world view, whereas religion and the ‘faith’ associated with it gives one a license to ignore or distort emprical evidence. That is about as incompatible as you can get. As Dennett and many others have pointed out, faith is just an excuse to believe any kind of crazy crap you want.

By: greg laden

greg laden — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 22:04:07 +0000

Fortunately, we (Americans … this is an international blog) do not live in a democracy. We live in a Constitutional Democracy with separation of powers. No individual is really allowed to do exactly what they want at any given time (that would include a revenge system which violates Due Process) and no individual, group, or institution can repress certain freedoms. A subset of those restrictions (but certainly not the only form of these restrictions, as is often mistaken by those with a more libertarian bent) is that the government cannot infringe the rights that are guaranteed by the constitution even if everybody wants that to happen.So you get freedom from religious coercion in schools (imperfectly) and you get the right to bear arms all rolled up into one.(Its funny how no on ever mentions the Third Amendment, but we get that protection as well.)

By: Eamon Knight

Eamon Knight — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 21:28:04 +0000

Science and religion are different ways of understanding the world.But the second one isn't a way of understanding the world, at least in any cognitive sense. Religious myths belong with the rest of literature (and the other arts) which at their best "speak" to us on an emotional level -- which is important, though I'm not sure it constitutes "understanding".

By: bigTom

bigTom — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:53:04 +0000

While I am in agreement with CRM, I also know that more Americans believe in angels, then in evolution. Given that we are living in a democracy, with a not very enlightened populace it is only good tactics to put the issue to the test. If we do that, we could end up with religion, and no science. So I think we gotta keep a relatively low profile for at least another generation. This is the compromise “teaching for our time *”.* Not needed in most of the EU.

By: Blake Stacey

Blake Stacey — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:29:53 +0000

“Different ways of understanding the world”?That’s pretty impressive, for a vague phrase which can’t be backed up.

By: CRM-114

CRM-114 — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 18:23:47 +0000

Science and Religion Offer Different Ways of Understanding the World?Yeah, one right and the other wrong. So say otherwise is utterly dishonest.Religious people offer no religious explanations for mathematics, chemistry, or geology, or for carpentry, masonry, or veterinary medicine. What they do offer are pretenses of explanations, ones which they know factually to be false.Lying is not a way of explaining, and lies are not a way of understanding. Lying misrepresents, and lies cause misunderstandings.

By: Dave Briggs

Dave Briggs — Fri, 04 Jan 2008 18:02:22 +0000

“As SCIENCE, EVOLUTION, AND CREATIONISM makes clear, the evidence for evolution can be fully compatible with religious faith. Science and religion are different ways of understanding the world. Needlessly placing them in opposition reduces the potential of each to contribute to a better future,” the book says.Gee, someone important said what I have been saying for years! I think I am going to faint! LOL!I have some scientist friends who believe the same thing! I just think that evolution started with the tiny creatures and continued up until the point where God told Adam to name the creatures. It kept going after that. Darwin’s finches are proof the process is still going on.I see so many hurt feelings and time wasted with this. I think I am going to start a third party, like the politicians do. The, “we promise to respect you, and play nice party!”Science has so much wonderful stuff to share with the world. It is a crying shame to see time taken up when people aren’t agreeing to disagree agreeably. I am not pointing any fingers at anyone, but it does make me want to cry when I see some brilliant scientist who could help humanity so much, having their time eaten up in arguments.Dave Briggs :~)