Science vs. religion : what scientists really think - File PDF
Science vs. religion : what scientists really think - File PDF
Science vs. religion : what scientists really think - File PDF
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Suppression or Engagement 77almost entirely a personal, private matter of being motivated by the desire tocare more for students. Other <strong>scientists</strong>, by far the smallest minority, worktoward actual, dynamic, public discussion.SCRIPTS OF SUPPRESSIONAs I talked with <strong>scientists</strong>, I found some who were propelled by current religiouschallenges in public schools to erect a strong barrier between scienceand <strong>religion</strong>. The most benign argument was that science and <strong>religion</strong> are incompletely separate realms. To a lesser extent, some argued that <strong>religion</strong> andthe opinions of religious people are so meaningless that they are simply notworth discussing. So even if students bring up <strong>religion</strong> in the classroom, these<strong>scientists</strong> believe it is best to simply ignore it. In particular, many of those whotaught at public universities could not imagine how <strong>religion</strong> could be discussedin the classroom in a way that would not violate the separation ofchurch and state. Responses like these reveal the kinds of boundaries thatsome <strong>scientists</strong> set up between <strong>religion</strong> and academic life. And boundarieshave powerful implications for how <strong>religion</strong> and science connect in universityclassrooms.“That’s Not What I’m Here For”I asked a chemist 8 who teaches at an Ivy League school how he responds whenstudents bring up issues related to <strong>religion</strong> during the chemistry courses heteaches. He said emphatically that he “would not engage in a discussion about<strong>religion</strong> with students inside [his] office or [his] classroom.” His reluctance todiscuss matters of faith occurs out of principle: It is “not because I’m necessarilyafraid of the consequences,” he said, “but that’s not <strong>what</strong> I’m here for. I’mnot a professor of <strong>religion</strong>, and I would not discuss religious matters with studentsin an academic teaching or research setting.” This chemist’s sentimentsecho those of other <strong>scientists</strong> who <strong>think</strong> it simply wrong to talk about mattersof faith in class when they do not know enough about these matters. They arenot experts on <strong>religion</strong>, and such discussions take time away from the areas onwhich they are.Even <strong>scientists</strong> who <strong>think</strong> that <strong>religion</strong> should never enter into teaching scienceoften ironically have a great personal interest in matters of faith and theirconnection to science. This is not to say, however, that they have much respect