Science vs. religion : what scientists really think - File PDF

xPREFACEdie out if they do not learn how to change with the times, to act more respectfullyto those who disagree with them, and how to present science in a morefavorable, understandable light. As the film ended, discussion began. And Iwatched incredulously as some of the scientists in the room confirmed Olson’saccusations. They erupted with totalizing criticisms of religion and religiouspeople, calling them “stupid fundamentalists,” oblivious that there were religiousacademics seated in the room. Sadly, when dialogue breaks down, thosescientists with the loudest voices seem to drown out those with a different,sometimes more open perspective.That’s why I have written this book. At its core, it’s about the scientistswhose voices have been thus far overlooked in the science-and-religion debatesand who might have powerful contributions to add to the cause of translatingscience to a broader public audience, especially a religious audience.This book was helped through its gestation by a community of scholars,friends, and family, who tirelessly read and helped edit the manuscript. Theconversations and practical help received from this community only made thework stronger. Any remaining weaknesses are mine alone.Those scientists who made this research possible by welcoming me intotheir labs and offices and sharing openly with me about their views deserve mysincere thanks. I have endeavored to represent their views as accurately as possible.I am thankful also to Oxford University Press for supporting this work,particularly to my editor, Cynthia Read, marketing manager Brian Hughes,and copyeditor Mark LaFlaur.This research was supported by several grants. Support for data collectioncame primarily from the John Templeton Foundation. In addition, I receivedfunding from the University at Buffalo, State University of New York, RiceUniversity’s sociology department, and the Center on Race, Religion, andUrban Life (CORRUL) at Rice University. The primary data collection wascompleted during a postdoctoral fellowship at Rice. I am appreciative for thequestions (both formal and informal) I received about the research after lecturesat Princeton University, New York University, University of Virginia,Baylor University, Northwestern University, University at Buffalo, SUNY, theFaraday Institute for Science and Religion at Cambridge University, and RiceUniversity. Several individuals provided useful feedback on portions of themanuscript through lengthy discussions at various phases of the research. Specialthanks go to Nancy Tatom Ammerman, Robert Bell, Philip Clayton, PennyEdgell, Michael Emerson , Robert C. Fay, George Gallup Jr., Ian Hutchinson,Stephen Klineberg, Elizabeth Long, William Martin, John Polkinghorne, DavidRichardson, Robert M. Stein, Jennifer Wiseman, and Robert Wuthnow forserving on a study advisory board. I had ongoing conversations with Wendy