Re: [asa] Scientists, Religion, and Politics

Well put, Randy. My pastor was preaching on Romans 3:4 "God forbid: yea,
let God be true, but every man a liar" last week and made an anti-evolution
dig, asking "how often do we hear of man's scientific wisdom changing?" I
sometimes wonder if pastors would understand this better if scientists
called new theories "reformations?"
__

Louise M. Freeman, PhD

Psychology Dept

Mary Baldwin College

Staunton, VA 24401

540-887-7326

FAX 540-887-7121

-----Original Message-----

From: "Randy Isaac" <randyisaac@comcast.net>

To: <asa@calvin.edu>

Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 21:08:46 -0400

Subject: Re: [asa] Scientists, Religion, and Politics

That's fair enough, Don, as far as it goes, but I think we
need a more complete picture to understand what this person was saying about

conservatism in scientists. Indeed, breaking new ground and having
innovative
ideas is the essence of science. That's just the ticket to get in and play.
Conservatism is not rejecting new ideas, it is the rigorous and strict
adherence
to the discipline of scientific methodology. In other words, coming up with
new
ideas isn't the hardest part, it's figuring out which new idea correctly
explains the world around us and convincing the scientific community
that this new idea is right. That takes a heap of hard-core
conservatism--how you carefully prepared your samples according to
time-tested
methods, how you meticulously avoided all contamination, how you set up the
experiment to differentiate all other possibilities, etc., etc. And until
you
convince the community that you did it all correctly, and they independently

reproduce it all, it's just another firecracker in the air.

Unfortunately, too often the innovative spirits who claim
to have better knowledge than the broader scientific community--be it the
young
age of the earth, opposition to global warming, the shortcomings of
evolution,
or whatever--forget the core conservatism that makes science work. One must
do
the hard work of sound scientific methodology and convince the scientific
community that it was done it correctly. Until then, those ideas are
wannabe's. They may be right in the long run and, if so, the scientific
community will figure it out sooner or later, but it is highly unlikely. No,

claiming that the scientific community is biased and simply refuses to
listen
to these superior ideas doesn't wash. That's a copout and a refusal to do
the really hard and thorough scientific work.

Conservatism in science means having clear, core values
and rigorous methodology for accepting new ideas into the scientific
community.

Randy

----- Original Message -----
  
From:
  Don
  Winterstein [mailto:dfwinterstein@msn.com]
  
To: asa [mailto:asa@calvin.edu]
  
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 12:26
  AM
  
Subject: Re: [asa] Scientists, Religion,
  and Politics
  

  
My two cents' worth:
  

  
The very nature of scientists' work is to challenge authority, the
  received "truth," and replace it with deductions from carefully measured
  data. One of a scientist's joys is proving an accepted theory
  incomplete or wrong.
  

  
The root meaning of conservatism has to do with opposing change and
  preserving the ways of the past. Religions also impose from on high,
  declare truth on the basis of "authority."
  

  
Hence a scientist who's immersed in his work and allows its
  methods to reach into the rest of his life will tend to challenge and
  oppose both standard versions of religious truth and conventional ways of
  living and governing.
  

  
The fact that scientists as kids often don't fit in probably
  contributes to the phenomenon.
  

  
Don
  

  
----- Original Message -----
    
From: Randy Isaac [mailto:randyisaac@comcast.net]
    
To: asa@calvin.edu [mailto:asa@calvin.edu]
    
Sent: Tuesday, July 14, 2009 9:01
    AM
    
Subject: Re: [asa] Scientists,
    Religion, and Politics
    
I recall that when I was in graduate school, oh so long ago,
    someone on the
faculty made the comment that scientists tended to be
    more liberal in
politics to counter their need to be so conservative in
    their science. I'm
not sure if there's any evidence for a human being to
    need a balance of
liberalism and conservatism in one's life, but it's an
    observation that
stuck with me.

Randy

----- Original
    Message -----
From: "Ted Davis" <TDavis@messiah.edu [mailto:TDavis@messiah.edu]>
To: "asa"
    <asa@calvin.edu [mailto:asa@calvin.edu]>; "Merv Bitikofer"
<mrb22667@kansas.net [mailto:mrb22667@kansas.net]>;
    
"Nucacids" <nucacids@wowway.com [mailto:nucacids@wowway.com]>
Sent:
    Tuesday, July 14, 2009 11:17 AM
Subject: Re: [asa] Scientists, Religion,
    and Politics

> Polls of this sort are never easy to interpret
    with much confidence. What
> polls have shown consistently for
    many years is that academics (including
> scientists) are far more
    "liberal" both politically and religiously than
> the general
    American population. That is a generalization, obviously, and
>
    any given academic or scientist can be a right-wing atheist, a left-wing

    
> Christian, or any other combination you can
    imagine.
>
> The reasons for this are not really clear to me,
    but even 60 years ago it
> was probably true that a large majority of
    leading physicists (confining
> my comments to physicists, since they
    are based on what I know anecdotally
> about the Manhattan Project)
    were very liberal politically and mainly
> irreligious. Some,
    like Oppenheimer, had considered Communism very
> seriously (his wife
    was the genuine article), and a few even worked
> covertly for the
    Soviets (American versions of Klaus Fuchs), as documented
>
    extensively by the new book, "Spies: The Rise and Fall of the KGB in
    
> America," based mainly on Soviet archives that became available
    briefly
> several years ago.
>
> I won't try even to
    guess at the reasons for this type of demographic, but
> I think it
    would not be too hard to refute a trivial conclusion that
>
    intelligence results in liberal political views and religious
scepticism.
    
> Plenty of corporate executives, attorneys, and other folk are also
    highly
> intelligent, and the demographics among them are probably
    not similar to
> those among academics and scientists. People
    in all walks of life tend to
> encourage and empower people who think
    similarly to themselves, and
> similarities of beliefs in these areas
    are surely part of that. As
> someone from a top research
    university once said to me, "places like [the
> university of X]
    don't hire people from places like Messiah."
>
>
    Ted
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu
[mailto:majordomo@calvin.edu] with
>
    "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
    

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu
[mailto:majordomo@calvin.edu]
    with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the
  message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Jul 15 21:38:46 2009