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

No God on the Quad 95were religious individuals with certain perspectives in their departments.If these religious individuals were in power—department chairs or fullprofessors—they might allow religion to enter their decision-making, whichwould have the eventual result of tainting the supposed purity of science. Anassociate professor, who is a microbiologist 31 at a large state research universityin the Midwest, explained that he has no problem with universities sponsoringreligious services for students, although he has no intimate knowledge of theseservices: “I’m sure there are religious groups that are official student organizationshere on campus, and I have no problem with that.” What this microbiologistwould find problematic is if religion appeared in his department. “Let’ssay the head of my department was a fundamentalist Christian of some kindand that started to influence the scientific content and decisions that were beingmade in microbiology. That would be inappropriate,” he explained. Interestingly,this biologist didn’t offer any “appropriate” ways that religion mightsurface in department life, and he defaults to describing what he calls “fundamentalistChristianity,” the form of religion that scientists find most dangerousto scientific progress.Scientists also mentioned that religion might be dangerous to reason and toscience if it entered departments at the level of hiring. A sociologist, 32 a namedchairprofessor who teaches at a large state research university in the Midwest,talked about the dangers of considering religion in hiring decisions. He mentionedhis son, who is an academic in a field where it is extremely difficult to geta job. Difficulty in finding academic employment has led his son to applywidely for jobs, even (he mentioned with some chagrin) those at religious colleges.At some of the religious schools where his son has applied, he was askedhow “your personal relationship with Jesus Christ will affect your daily work inteaching.” The sociologist found “that kind of thing really quite revolting.” Hewould certainly “draw the line” at having “religious tests for faculty” be a partof the academic environment.Those scientists who mentioned being fearful that religion might come intohiring decisions did not mention a corresponding fear that religious applicantsmight be discriminated against. And their examples were always related to confessionalreligious colleges and universities having “litmus tests” for hiring faculty;there were no examples given of a secular research university—the kindsof institutions where the scientists I interviewed taught—doing the same thing.Further, since most faculty at elite research universities who are religious keeptheir faith commitments secret, it would be unlikely that their faith would havethe kind of impact that this sociologist feared.It seemed difficult for faculty who thought that religion was dangerous tothe life of the mind, to reason, and to science, to resolve their views with the