Entry 782, on 2008-05-30 at 19:25:19 (Rating 4, Religion)
I listened to a podcast in the contentious Infidel Guy series today. It was an interview with PZ Myers, author of the popular science blog Pharyngula. Most of these podcasts are controversial and are generally uncomplimentary to religious believers (although more moderate believers are usually treated fairly well) do its no surprise that I found a lot of what PZ said was relevant to me.
An important point he made was that religion and science are not compatible. Many people claim they are, but I think this is often an attempt to placate the opposition - especially in countries where the majority are religious - and I don't know if they really believe their own claims of compatibility. No matter how you look at it the basic world views of the two things are quite different: science demands evidence and objectivity, religion finds belief and faith sufficient.
PZ doesn't think religion will go away quickly. His hope is that it will just gradually disappear and eventually religious believers will be viewed in a similar way to how we now view supporters of other quaint beliefs, such as flat Earth: that is an amusing but deluded group who do no real harm. This is the way I look at religious people already so its really just a matter of ridiculing them sufficiently that the majority eventually catch on.
He also points out that there are smart people who believe in a religion, but not many. As intelligence and knowledge increases religious belief decreases. In a country where about three quarters of the population are Christians only 5 to 10% of the top scientific organisation, the American Academy of Sciences, are religious. That seems significant to me.
Science will gradually erode away belief in religion and that's something that the more rabid believers know. That's why they are fighting a desperate rearguard action against science (especially evolution) in the US today. They know that if the scientific facts are revealed in school that it will damage belief in Biblical creation and other absurd ideas.
I know from my own debates with believers that when the facts of evolution are presented to them they are often astounded to learn that its nothing like what they have either been told or assumed. Clearly they are not being given the facts and equally clearly when they are given the facts it often produces some doubt in the truth of their religious beliefs.
I hear the same old objections to evolution over and over again, even though they are childishly simple to refute. If we evolved from monkeys why are there still monkeys? Do they really think this is a question worth asking? If evolution is real why are there no transitional fossils? They obviously didn't look very far and conveniently ignored the amazing transitional forms we already know about. And how can a random process create such complex life? Evolution isn't completely random, and even if it was a failure on their part through personal incredulity hardly counts as serious evidence against one of science's best theories.
If I was a creationist I would be worried by all this and I would cheat and lie to any extent to block the truth from being known. To creationists this is, no doubt, a war and secularists, scientists, and other people who support rationality should be treating it that way too.
There are no comments for this entry.
You can leave comments about this using this form.
Enter name, email (optional), enter number, comment, click Add. You can leave the name blank if you want to remain anonymous. Enter your email address to receive notifications of replies. Comment should appear immediately (authorisation is inactive).
BLOG PAGE