From Cornelius Hunter at Darwin’s God, discussing The Real Conflict Between Science and Religion:
But as Henry Kissinger described academia, the battles are so fierce because the stakes are so small. From the outside the conflict between atheist evolutionists and theist evolutionists is rather meaningless. For the atheists, in spite of all their bluster, are no different than the theists in their religious beliefs. They call themselves atheists, but their convictions about god are as strong as anyone’s. (see examples here and here).
So yes many evolutionists are atheists, but as usual the theology rules. Evolutionists are either theists who hold strong religious convictions or atheists who hold strong religious convictions. Either way the science suffers. I guess you could say there is a conflict between religion and science after all.
Interesting perspective. But does the science have to suffer? I’m not necessarily convinced.
He also states (earlier in the post),
… a recent poll showed that a majority of scientists (51%) say they believe in God or a higher power. And that is up from the 42% who responded similarly almost a century ago in 1914.
The problem is not so much that religion conflicts with science as it co-opts science.
Again, interesting perspective – and I’ll let it go at that.
Nice to hear from you, Mike!
Science is itself, when properly done, totally independent of the religious beliefs of the practitioner. This doesn’t make religion and science compatible. The conflict comes when the religious make factual claims related to the interaction and the supernatural and expect that to be accepted.
I’ll let it go at that.