The challenges of being a religious scientist

[webmdave]

(The Conversation) — Stereotypes about religion and science can create challenges for religious grad students.

The post The challenges of being a religious scientist appeared first on Religion News Service.

View the full article

[walterpthefirst]

This article mentions the scientist Francis Collins.  He is a good example of why bringing science and religion together is a  bad  idea.

 

Notable scientists who hold to a Christian faith, like Collins, John Lennox,  Hugh Ross and John Polkinghorne have all used scientific evidence to publicly claim that it supports the existence of THEIR god, Jesus Christ.

 

This is absolutely, totally, completely and 100% false.

 

No scientific evidence identifies who this supposed god must be.  What is actually happening here is that these men wrongly conclude by religious faith that their god is the one identified by the scientific evidence.  In the same way Muslim scientists can claim exactly the same thing - that the evidence identifies Allah as god.  Or scientists who are believers in any religion could do the same thing.

 

So, when it comes to scientists with religious beliefs, there is a level playing field.  No one religion or faith is any stronger in its claims than any other.  They can all make the same claims, using the same scientific evidence, but the true identity of this supposed god still remains unknown.  If they do this then they are using their religious beliefs and NOT the evidence to identify this god.

 

And this is why mixing faith (which does not require evidence) with science (which does require evidence) is a bad idea.  The two things are different and separate and distinct as apples and oranges, chalk and cheese or oil and water.  They should not be mixed together but must be treated as two separate and different disciplines.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[☆ moxieflux66 ☆]

37 minutes ago, walterpthefirst said:

So, when it comes to scientists with religious beliefs, there is a level playing field.

Does this not apply to (so-called) xtian scientists? And Latter Day Saints? Ever thought about how these two religions, made in the good old USA, are more capitalist in nature than the others? I love it! American ingenuity at its finest. 

Imagine...a guy who wrote science fiction novels created an entire religion out of it. 

A guy with a silly dream that he found golden tablets and started a religion around it, complete with magic underwear! 

And they get more 'out there' all the time. 

[☆ moxieflux66 ☆]

After reading the article, I was surprised by the numbers. And saddened. Never noticed the 'atheist' assumption when I took classes too long ago, except in Philosophy, where the xtians would lie in wait to argue. 

 

Since we are a more diverse population but not necessarily more tolerant, it makes sense that the trend toward this type of polarization is occurring. But it makes more sense to allow the diversity to occur as it will and allow learning and religion to develop as it may, especially when it brings about positive change in our social structure, and in my personal experience, medicine. Otherwise, how do we survive? 

[walterpthefirst]

5 hours ago, moxieflux66 said:

Does this not apply to (so-called) xtian scientists? And Latter Day Saints? Ever thought about how these two religions, made in the good old USA, are more capitalist in nature than the others? I love it! American ingenuity at its finest. 

Imagine...a guy who wrote science fiction novels created an entire religion out of it. 

A guy with a silly dream that he found golden tablets and started a religion around it, complete with magic underwear! 

And they get more 'out there' all the time. 

 

Yes, it applies equally to all religions, Moxie.

 

There are no definitive indicators in reality that point to one particular god.

 

There is nothing, no data or evidence anywhere in science, that identifies which of the many gods humans believe in is the true god.

 

 

But the problem doesn't lie 'out there' in the wider universe.

 

There problem lies 'in here' in the hearts and minds of those scientists with strong religious beliefs.

 

On an emotional level they very much want to see their particular beliefs validated, supported and justified by scientific evidence.

 

 

And so they compromise their professional scientific integrity by claiming that science has found evidence for their particular god.

 

They sacrifice their necessary scientific objectivity by yielding to their emotional investment in their religion.

 

They fail to leave their emotional biases at the door and instead bring them into their work.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

 

[☆ moxieflux66 ☆]

2 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

But the problem doesn't lie 'out there' in the wider universe.

 

There problem lies 'in here' in the hearts and minds of those scientists with strong religious beliefs.

 

On an emotional level they very much want to see their particular beliefs validated, supported and justified by scientific evidence.

 

 

And so they compromise their professional scientific integrity by claiming that science has found evidence for their particular god.

 

They sacrifice their necessary scientific objectivity by yielding to their emotional investment in their religion.

 

They fail to leave their emotional biases at the door and instead bring them into their work.

 

I'm still missing something then. To what end? What's the door prize for getting the 'right' god? Does everyone then follow you? Is this the Ultimate Ego Trip? I still don't understand. 

Say somehow, scientifically speaking one particular 'god' won out among the millions of gods throughout all of history. What then? What ultimately happens? What's the reward for it? 

What am I missing?? 

If it's the Eternal Bliss we all expected when we sought redemption for our souls all those years ago, regardless of having to sell it to someone else, ANYONE else to be at peace with it, I can understand. I also understand the emotion of that 'eureka!' moment where you guess something right in your hypothesis. 

Sorry to carry on but this is something I can't even get an answer from our hapless xtian friends here. 

One thing that always made me suspicious is if someone claimed to know 'the meaning of life' or the 'secret of life' or some such thing. 

[◊ Weezer ◊]

2 hours ago, moxieflux66 said:

I'm still missing something then. To what end? What's the door prize for getting the 'right' god?

 

Everlasting life?  Avoid hell?  And be part of the "in-crowd" (in the persons mind)??  Hero worship of the superman of the universe??  

 

And ego!! 

 

 

[☆ moxieflux66 ☆]

23 minutes ago, Weezer said:

 

Everlasting life?  Avoid hell?  And be part of the "in-crowd" (in the persons mind)??  Hero worship of the superman of the universe??  

 

And ego!! 

 

 

But....out of a World Wide Lottery, of sorts? Where billions of people are competing for the prize? Doesn't it still mean an individual's personal 'belief' he/she doesn't have to sell?? What's the point in trying to convince someone else if you yourself are truly in possession of THE TRUTH? Why isn't that enough? 

Most of the time I think christians are trying harder to convince themselves of their beliefs than trying to convince me. 

[walterpthefirst]

7 hours ago, moxieflux66 said:

But....out of a World Wide Lottery, of sorts? Where billions of people are competing for the prize? Doesn't it still mean an individual's personal 'belief' he/she doesn't have to sell?? What's the point in trying to convince someone else if you yourself are truly in possession of THE TRUTH? Why isn't that enough? 

Most of the time I think christians are trying harder to convince themselves of their beliefs than trying to convince me. 

 

I think you've answered your own question ('To what end?') from earlier on, Moxie.

 

 

When I was a fiery, deeply-committed Christian I dearly wanted scientists to confirm that a weird-looking shape on the flanks of Mount Ararat was indeed Noah's Ark.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durupınar_site

 

Now that I'm an Ex-Christian of many years I can look back and see that my interest in that finding was purely selfish.  As you astutely pointed out in your last sentence above, I was trying harder to convince myself of the truth of my beliefs than trying to convince anyone else.

 

And I can now recognize the signs of similar things happening in the lives of other, deeply-religious people. 

 

For example, a few years ago the BBC screened a short historical series about the ancient Frankincense trade route through the Middle East.  It was presented by Kate Humble, a no-nonsense and irreligious Western woman who, when she was journeying through Muslim countries, refused to cover her head in deference to the edicts laid down by the Quran.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00mfzjr/episodes/guide  

 

In episode 2 she was being shown around the Saudi Arabian city of Jeddah by a guide, who took her to a wonderful vantage point overlooking the place.  They were there at exactly the time in the evening that the muezzins were starting their call to prayer.  This was probably not accidental.  I got the impression that Kate's guide wanted her to see, hear and experience something beautiful in relation to his faith.

 

The many mosques in Jeddah magnified the singing voices of the muezzins using loudspeakers and one by one the call to prayer was taken up all over the city, drowning out the noise of the traffic.  It was hauntingly beautiful.  So much so that Kate broke down in tears, deeply moved by what she hearing.  "Oh... it's so beautiful.  So beautiful!"  I recall her saying between sobs and the wiping away of tears. 

 

And what was the reaction of her Arabian guide?  Here was a thoroughly modern, unbelieving Western woman moved to tears by the beauty of the rites of his religion.   He told her that these chants and songs had been sung every day in Jeddah for fifteen hundred years.  You could see from the smile on his face and the look in his eyes that he was taking her emotional reaction as CONFIRMATION of the truth of his faith.

 

Did he deliberately take her there to convince himself of the truth of his religion?  That's impossible to say for sure.  But, whether this happened by accident or by design, I believe that I saw the same feelings cross his face as would have crossed mine if an unbeliever had been moved to tears by the singing in my church.  I know for certain that I would have taken this as some kind of PROOF that god was working in the heart and mind of that unbeliever - to bring them to the foot of the cross.

 

 

Of course, in neither case was there confirmation or proof of anything, Moxie.

 

All that was happening was that people were having an emotional reaction to something beautiful that just happened to be in a religious setting.  Emotions on their own can often lead us astray and we should be extremely wary of assigning them deep meaning.  We have large front cortex's in our brains and we should use them to balance out our emotional excesses.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

[☆ moxieflux66 ☆]

2 hours ago, walterpthefirst said:

 

I think you've answered your own question ('To what end?') from earlier on, Moxie.

 

 

When I was a fiery, deeply-committed Christian I dearly wanted scientists to confirm that a weird-looking shape on the flanks of Mount Ararat was indeed Noah's Ark.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durupınar_site

 

Now that I'm an Ex-Christian of many years I can look back and see that my interest in that finding was purely selfish.  As you astutely pointed out in your last sentence above, I was trying harder to convince myself of the truth of my beliefs than trying to convince anyone else.

 

And I can now recognize the signs of similar things happening in the lives of other, deeply-religious people. 

 

For example, a few years ago the BBC screened a short historical series about the ancient Frankincense trade route through the Middle East.  It was presented by Kate Humble, a no-nonsense and irreligious Western woman who, when she was journeying through Muslim countries, refused to cover her head in deference to the edicts laid down by the Quran.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00mfzjr/episodes/guide  

 

In episode 2 she was being shown around the Saudi Arabian city of Jeddah by a guide, who took her to a wonderful vantage point overlooking the place.  They were there at exactly the time in the evening that the muezzins were starting their call to prayer.  This was probably not accidental.  I got the impression that Kate's guide wanted her to see, hear and experience something beautiful in relation to his faith.

 

The many mosques in Jeddah magnified the singing voices of the muezzins using loudspeakers and one by one the call to prayer was taken up all over the city, drowning out the noise of the traffic.  It was hauntingly beautiful.  So much so that Kate broke down in tears, deeply moved by what she hearing.  "Oh... it's so beautiful.  So beautiful!"  I recall her saying between sobs and the wiping away of tears. 

 

And what was the reaction of her Arabian guide?  Here was a thoroughly modern, unbelieving Western woman moved to tears by the beauty of the rites of his religion.   He told her that these chants and songs had been sung every day in Jeddah for fifteen hundred years.  You could see from the smile on his face and the look in his eyes that he was taking her emotional reaction as CONFIRMATION of the truth of his faith.

 

Did he deliberately take her there to convince himself of the truth of his religion?  That's impossible to say for sure.  But, whether this happened by accident or by design, I believe that I saw the same feelings cross his face as would have crossed mine if an unbeliever had been moved to tears by the singing in my church.  I know for certain that I would have taken this as some kind of PROOF that god was working in the heart and mind of that unbeliever - to bring them to the foot of the cross.

 

 

Of course, in neither case was there confirmation or proof of anything, Moxie.

 

All that was happening was that people were having an emotional reaction to something beautiful that just happened to be in a religious setting.  Emotions on their own can often lead us astray and we should be extremely wary of assigning them deep meaning.  We have large front cortex's in our brains and we should use them to balance out our emotional excesses.

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

That was a profoundly beautiful story and a really great observation. I feel a religious experience by walking alone in the woods (which I now call 'church'). I can get that same feeling by listening to ANY beautiful music that makes me stop what I am doing just to listen to it. I get it from reading a profound statement that flows from someone's heart. 

I get it by falling in love with someone.

 

I've had the most beautiful emotional experiences of all by falling in love and couldn't help but attribute it to 'god' (since I was still indoctrinated by xtianity). When the marriage (and 'god' failed me) it really hurt. But it was my expectation that 'god' would never leave me that hurt the worst. 

 

Why attribute it at all to 'god'? Why not take it as it is: a beautiful moments that only reflect a small part of god? 

[walterpthefirst]

Why attribute it at all to 'god'? Why not take it as it is: a beautiful moments that only reflect a small part of god? 

 

 

Ah, perhaps here's where we diverge, Moxie.

 

As a confirmed sceptic and atheist I cannot see any evidence that enables me to attribute any of it to god.

 

But, each to their own, right?

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

p.s.

Thanks for the kind words about my earlier post.  I appreciate it.  

 

 

[☆ moxieflux66 ☆]

1 hour ago, walterpthefirst said:

Why attribute it at all to 'god'? Why not take it as it is: a beautiful moments that only reflect a small part of god? 

 

 

Ah, perhaps here's where we diverge, Moxie.

 

As a confirmed sceptic and atheist I cannot see any evidence that enables me to attribute any of it to god.

 

But, each to their own, right?

 

 

Thank you,

 

Walter.

 

 

p.s.

Thanks for the kind words about my earlier post.  I appreciate it.  

 

 

Oh wait. I should explain here that my use of the word 'god' is more of a placeholder than a concrete concept to me, and for lack of a better word. I personally don't feel the need to label it as 'something' (or God). It is what it is. 

 

[◊ Weezer ◊]

5 hours ago, moxieflux66 said:

Oh wait. I should explain here that my use of the word 'god' is more of a placeholder than a concrete concept to me, and for lack of a better word. I personally don't feel the need to label it as 'something' (or God). It is what it is. 

 

I see you originally put quotation marks around god.   Perhaps you mean it is something like a small beautiful part of our existence?

 

And perhaps, like myself, you don’t believe in the biblical “god”, but also don’t believe this extremely complex universe just “happened” from nothing??  That perhaps there was some kind of “creator” somewhere at sometime??  And maybe that creator caused the Big Bang??  And All the matter and energy for the Big Bang had to come from somewhere.  So maybe there was a “god” of some kind out there somewhere??
 

 

[☆ moxieflux66 ☆]

12 minutes ago, Weezer said:

I see you originally put quotation marks around god.   Perhaps you mean it is something like a small beautiful part of our existence?

 

And perhaps, like myself, you don’t believe in the biblical “god”, but also don’t believe this extremely complex universe just “happened” from nothing??  That perhaps there was some kind of “creator” somewhere at sometime??  And maybe that creator caused the Big Bang??  And All the matter and energy for the Big Bang had to come from somewhere.  So maybe there was a “god” of some kind out there somewhere??
 

 

As far as beliefs go, the bible god is mostly in the rear view mirror as far as explanations for the Universe. The residuals show up unexpectedly sometimes. 

But I do believe in the Law of Conservation of Energy which posits energy cannot be created or destroyed but merely changes form. 

And also the axiom, "As above, so below". From the smallest microbe to the entire Universe (what we know so far of each), there is birth, growth and death. The constants. The Universe inhales and exhales. When was its first breath? I don't know. Will there be a last breath? Don't know that either. 

I'm ok with the uncertainty. It took a long time to figure out how to enjoy the ride. 

[◊ Weezer ◊]

It occurred to me also that, supposedly, energy cannot be created or destroyed.  So maybe matter and energy have always existed in some form??  
 

yep, it’s a HUGE mystery that I don’t expect to be solved in my lifetime.  Just do the best with what you got, in the time you got to do it in. 

[☆ moxieflux66 ☆]

12 minutes ago, Weezer said:

So maybe matter and energy have always existed in some form??

Is that god? A bunch of energy floating around waiting to go somewhere? 

 

[◊ Weezer ◊]

1 minute ago, moxieflux66 said:

Is that god? A bunch of energy floating around waiting to go somewhere? 

 

I almost laughed out loud.  Then thought, Hey!  Is that a possibility?? . It’s more logical than the Bible!

[☆ moxieflux66 ☆]

8 minutes ago, Weezer said:

I almost laughed out loud.  Then thought, Hey!  Is that a possibility?? . It’s more logical than the Bible!

I believe the only limits on god are our own imaginations and I have an ever-evolving one. 

[◊ Weezer ◊]

10 minutes ago, moxieflux66 said:

I believe the only limits on god are our own imaginations and I have an ever-evolving one. 

Ditto. 

[TABA]

During my deconversion process, when I was done with christianity but still inclined to hold onto some concept of “god”, I read this book, “A God that Could be Real”.

https://a.co/d/cOmnsKu

 

It stretched the concept of god so far as to make it worthless, in my opinion, and far removed from the meaning of the word for the vast majority of people.  When I was done, I was able to let go of any remaining attachment to the word or the concept.  So it wasn’t a waste of time: it brought me closure, you might say.