Question:
If science, in its proper context, is compatible with Christian faith;
if science, as _professionally_ practiced today, is for the most part
religiously neutral;
then why
is science, as portrayed in _popular_ culture, so often colored in
naturalistic/atheistic hues?
The students in my January-term Christianity-and-science class asked
that question. They then brainstormed some answers to that question.
(The students were Christina Alexander, Joel Alexander, Benjamin
Anderson, Justin Apple, Jennifer Bergman, Clark Cully, Christopher
Dutil, Susan Greiner, Jonathan Kornoelje, Daniel Quigley, Lindsey
Ruffin, Carol Vanderveen, Angelique VanDyke, Clinton Weening, Jonathan
Zylstra.)
They came up with an impressive list of answers, which I would like to
share. (Perhaps people in this discussion group can add more reasons.)
1) North-American society today equates "religious neutrality" with the
complete absence of talk about God --- functional agnosticism or
functional atheism. So when people today attempt to talk about science
and the results of science in a "religiously neutral" way, they believe
that, in order to do so, they must make no mention of God at all.
2) People confuse methodological naturalism with philosophical
naturalism.
3) The methodology of science is good for seeking truth at one level,
the physical level. It is does not give much insight into truths at
other levels, such as the spiritual level. When looking at nature,
everyone --- scientists and non-scientists alike --- ordinarily reads
spiritual meaning into it, especially issues such as the beginning and
end of the universe, the beginning of human life, the functioning of
the brain, etc. When non-scientists see scientists treat these issues
with the methodology of science (emphasizing only truths at the
physical level), they wonder if they were _wrong_ to think about them
spiritually. They wonder if naturalistic/atheistic thinking is "all
that science allows."
4) Every person has a desire to be "independent of God." When people
see science giving us greater knowledge and power, they are tempted to
adopt "the progress of science" into their desire for independence from
God.
5) Whenever people believe a theological or spiritual premise (for
example, the premise that "God created human beings"), they almost
always attach some assumptions about mechanism (e.g. they have in mind
some hypothesis about _how_ God created human beings). If and when the
findings of science disagree with the _mechanism_ that they pictured,
they interpret this as science attacking their _theological_ belief.
6) Because of attitudes within the church, many scientists who are
Christian may be discouraged from writing books and speaking publicly
on these issues -- which leaves the voice of naturalistic/atheistic
interpreters of science mostly unchallenged.
As you see, the list is not only impressive, but also somewhat
frightening. It reveals just how large a problem we face as we try to
educate people that science and Christian faith are not enemies.
============
Loren Haarsma
Calvin College
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jun 15 2000 - 13:24:00 EDT