http://blog.talkingphilosophy.com/?p=9169
EXCERPT: There is currently a fashion for religion/science accommodationism, the idea that there’s room for religious faith within a scientifically informed understanding of the world. Accommodationism of this kind gains endorsement even from official science organizations such as, in the United States, the National Academy of Sciences and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. But how well does it withstand scrutiny? Not too well, according to a new book by distinguished biologist Jerry A. Coyne....
(Jan 6, 2016 04:47 AM)C C Wrote: [ -> ]http://blog.talkingphilosophy.com/?p=9169
EXCERPT: There is currently a fashion for religion/science accommodationism, the idea that there’s room for religious faith within a scientifically informed understanding of the world. Accommodationism of this kind gains endorsement even from official science organizations such as, in the United States, the National Academy of Sciences and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. But how well does it withstand scrutiny? Not too well, according to a new book by distinguished biologist Jerry A. Coyne....
It could be that there was a benevolent deity that had a part in reality once upon a time. But evidence for such a being existing now is lacking.
(Jan 6, 2016 04:47 AM)C C Wrote: [ -> ]There is currently a fashion for religion/science accommodationism, the idea that there’s room for religious faith within a scientifically informed understanding of the world.
The idea that religion is primarily a matter of faith is a peculiarly Christian understanding of what religion is. (Most religions are more concerned with practice than with the content of belief.)
It's interesting (and a little sad) that atheists so often seem to think of 'religion' in thoroughly Christian terms. Atheists (even those who call themselves 'secular Jews') are often just as embedded in an evangelical Protestant paradigm as those they despise, except that they react violently against it.
Regarding 'accomodationism', anyone even halfway familiar with the history of science should know that historically, most scientists have possessed some kind of personal religious sensibility. That was as true for Einstein and Schroedinger as it was for Newton and Kepler.
Quote:Accommodationism of this kind gains endorsement even from official science organizations such as, in the United States, the National Academy of Sciences and the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
What's the alternative supposed to be? Scientists espousing militant atheism and writing poorly-informed popular atheism titles isn't going to make religion go away. And religious hostility towards particular scientific ideas isn't going to make those ideas go away.
Given that fact, given the fact that most scientists possess some religiosity, and given that most religious people value and respect science, everyone probably should strive for peaceful coexistence.
I don't think that's impossible at all, as long as religious people avoid scriptural literalism on scientific matters such as creation and the origin of biological 'kinds', and scientists avoid grasping too tightly to metaphysical naturalism and stop promoting doctrines like the so-called 'conflict thesis' (science and religion in a historical/cultural death-struggle) which don't appear to be supported by the historical evidence.
Quote:But how well does it withstand scrutiny? Not too well, according to a new book....
Some of the less interesting 'new' atheists seem to have concluded that religion is bullshit and there's no reason for them to waste valuable time getting formal education in bullshit. (They already have PhDs and prestige teaching appointments, so why bother?) Unfortunately, that's a recipe for ignorance, shallow thinking and noisy but unconvincing rhetoric.