12.07.2015 Views

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

110Society and Broader PublicsAnother way that <strong>religion</strong> can be considered legitimate is as a subject ofstudy. This view is generated from a model of the university as a place whereanything that influences the physical or human world is worthy of investigation.Even for these <strong>scientists</strong>, however, there are academic boundaries withinwhich <strong>religion</strong> ought to remain. If <strong>religion</strong> is an object of study, it should bestudied only in <strong>religion</strong> departments.A minority of <strong>scientists</strong> (less than 20 percent) <strong>think</strong> that <strong>religion</strong> can meaningfullyintersect with their particular research and with the education of their students.They see <strong>religion</strong> as important to science ethics and as potentially helpful inguiding research questions. This model comes from a view of education andresearch as having multiple knowledge sources, including <strong>religion</strong> as one of thesesources. A perception of discrimination can also accompany this view; those<strong>scientists</strong> who <strong>think</strong> <strong>religion</strong> is both important as a form of knowledge and as acompelling belief system say they sometimes experience bias in their universities.THE MODEL OF NURTURE: UNIVERSITIESOUGHT TO NURTURE STUDENTS—INCLUDINGSPIRITUALLY—IN THEIR FORMATIVE YEARSMost of the 42 percent of <strong>scientists</strong> I interviewed who thought there could besome positive role for <strong>religion</strong> on campuses specifically mentioned universitiessupporting the private expression of <strong>religion</strong>. Their examples of support rangedfrom tolerance (not standing in the way of personal religious expression) andsymbolic support, to universities providing money, space, and personnel to theorganizations that undergird religious life on campus. This latter view relatesdirectly to a model of university life that stresses the role of universities as providingcare for their members in arenas of life not directly related to scholarship.The rationale endorses exercise facilities, for example, to take care of the physicalbody, as well as chapels and religious programs to care for students of faith. 10Those who feel strongly that <strong>religion</strong> ought to be an important, personalpart of people’s lives also support universities going to great lengths, includingfinancial support, to make sure that there is an active religious life on campus.This might include supporting student religious organizations; allowing studentsto have religious holidays off; providing centers, chapels, and chaplains;and making sure that the legal structure of the university enables individualfaculty and students to follow their moral religious convictions. 11A psychologist,12a Quaker with some Buddhist practices for whom beliefin God is not central, remarked, “Universities are charged with taking care of

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!