2008 Woodie Awards
Illini Media
WPGU
buzz
Illio
TechnographScience has not disproved religion
Posted: 5/1/08 Section: Letters
In his column, "Science, Religion and New Internationalism," Othman O'Malley contends that modern science and rational thought has liberated humanity from the false and destructive ideologies of religion. In doing so, Mr. O'Malley has committed a common mistake; assuming that science has disproved religion. It is not only untrue but impossible for science to disprove religion as they operate in two entirely different and distinct spheres. The problem that typically occurs is when religion makes unnecessary divine associations with old science and then clings desperately to them as a matter of faith.
Science's role is to describe, categorize and articulate the natural world; that is, the world presented to our senses or subject to reasonable inference based on those senses.
Religion, on the other hand, is the stuff of the soul. It teaches us how to live with each other as not merely social, but spiritual beings and directs our reverent attention to the splendor of God. Moreover, religion gives to humankind something which no scientific breakthrough or Hobbesian social contract ever could; a source of purpose and hope; a knowledge that existence does not end in death and a firm expectation that ultimately all injustices will be redressed and that redemption will be brought to the afflicted.
Thankfully, this comforting and inspiring world view is more than simply a security blanket which the irrational or uneducated cling to. It is a substantial, defensible, believable and logical system capable of satisfying both the most rational mind and the most hopeful heart. While space limitations deny sufficient treatment of the theist case, suffice it to say that atheism is by no means the consensus of the real scientific community and that the curious can find legitimate theistic scientists (Francis Collins, etc.).
Jay Geyer
Sophomore in LAS
Science's role is to describe, categorize and articulate the natural world; that is, the world presented to our senses or subject to reasonable inference based on those senses.
Religion, on the other hand, is the stuff of the soul. It teaches us how to live with each other as not merely social, but spiritual beings and directs our reverent attention to the splendor of God. Moreover, religion gives to humankind something which no scientific breakthrough or Hobbesian social contract ever could; a source of purpose and hope; a knowledge that existence does not end in death and a firm expectation that ultimately all injustices will be redressed and that redemption will be brought to the afflicted.
Thankfully, this comforting and inspiring world view is more than simply a security blanket which the irrational or uneducated cling to. It is a substantial, defensible, believable and logical system capable of satisfying both the most rational mind and the most hopeful heart. While space limitations deny sufficient treatment of the theist case, suffice it to say that atheism is by no means the consensus of the real scientific community and that the curious can find legitimate theistic scientists (Francis Collins, etc.).
Jay Geyer
Sophomore in LAS
The Daily Illini encourages on-topic discussion through article commenting on its articles and blogs. It is our policy not to delete any comments based upon political or ideological point of view. However, we reserve the right to remove comments that are abusive, off-topic or use excessive foul language.
The posting of copyrighted material, including any and all content for which you are not the author, is illegal under Federal intellectual property laws. Such activity will not be tolerated. Comments containing copyrighted material will be removed, and continued violation of copyright law is grounds for being banned completely from commenting on DailyIllini.com.
If you feel any post meets these conditions or merits review, please e-mail our editors at meonline@dailyillini.com.
Viewing Comments 1 - 3 of 4
Jim
posted 5/01/08 @ 7:54 AM CST
Nowhere in Othman's column did he state or imply that science has "disproved" religion; he simply presented some (not particularly original) ideas regarding the positive effects of rational thinking and liberation from ancient superstition. (Continued…)
John Gabel
posted 5/01/08 @ 10:47 AM CST
Whether or not Othman used the word "disprove" in his column (I trust Jim's account that he didn't), the article set up a false dichotomy of "science vs. (Continued…)
Freebird
posted 5/01/08 @ 1:54 PM CST
Thanks to Jay for writing from a theistic point of view; I hope you don't face the sort of ad-hominem responses theists often face.
I agree partly with your response but I am repeatedly perplexed by statements like the one you made:
"It is not only untrue but impossible for science to disprove religion as they operate in two entirely different and distinct spheres. (Continued…)
Post a Comment