The Naked Scientists Forum
General Discussion & Feedback
Radio Show & Podcast Feedback
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
30/09/2015 16:50:01 »
Paul asked the Naked Scientists:
Earlier this morning I said I did not Understand how scientists could be Christians (or other religion, depending on your country). However with a little thought on the bus to work I realise it all boils down to funding. One must be very PC and not ruffle too many feathers if you have a pet project and you need funding for it. I understand Einstein didn't believe in a personal god. I suppose he needed to be diplomatic, not to upset his Jewish mother. However I think there were folk who took umbrage at his views.
What do you think?
Last Edit: 30/09/2015 16:50:01 by _system
Reply #1 on:
30/09/2015 17:07:15 »
I think the only way for an atheist scientist to behave in an environment where patronage matters (and the patrons are narrow-minded believers) is never to express any opinion on religious matters at all. This is far less hypocritical than going through the motions, like most politicians who must be seen going to church.
I remember David Attenborough used to be criticised quite strongly for his programmes about the wonder and beauty of nature and never expressing any opinions about the religious interpretation of the world we live in. He defended himself very well in an interview I saw, and I still don't know what his religious views are (but I can guess). But I think that is how it should be.
Neilep Level Member
Reply #2 on:
30/09/2015 19:26:16 »
And all the scientists who are practicing Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Mormons, etc. How does expressing their religion help in getting funding from Christians?
Reply #3 on:
01/10/2015 21:40:40 »
Religions makes one believe in something that is higher than oneself and man. This POV is very useful to science, since such a scientist, will only be able to settle for the truth, since the truth is always higher than human politics. If you play politics, this may help your career, but it can develop a pattern of compromising what is true for convenience. This may result in a flaw in one's ability to seek truth in science, if such truth upsets the cart. The religious scientists accepts a truth that is higher than any human cart of butt wiping. They may not rise as high and may even become confined to the little table.
Manmade global warming was sales pitched as being backed by a consensus of scientists. The problem is, science is not about consensus, but rather it about even one series of hard data able to override any consensus and change everything. Consensus is more connected to politics, which is about spinning the truth if favor of political advantages. This may be OK with atheist science, but this is not acceptable to those who seek truth higher than themselves and politics.
Atheists assume all people in religion are stalled at first grade Sunday school teachings, such as Adam and Eve. The fact is, this is where most atheists are stalled about religion since they don't like the subject. As you advance in any area of study, including religion, things are not as simple as one is first taught. First grade science may teach that the atom is like planets orbiting the sun. Later this Adam/atom is defined by wave functions, but only after prerequisites are satisfied. The same is true in religion, which becomes philosophical.
Even if a person assumed God made all creation, there is no law in the bible against figuring out how this all works using the tools of science, as long as you seek the truth, and not compromise truth.