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

8Crossing the Picket Lines: The Personal Faith of Scientistssocial environment—including public debates about intelligent design,embryonic stem cell research, human cloning, public funding for science, andmuch more—that simply can’t be avoided.Scientists tend to view the impact of religion on science education entirelythrough a frame of conflict, often blaming Americans’ poor understanding ofscience on religion, arguing in particular that fundamentalist forms of Christianityinhibit science learning. There is some evidence to support these accusations.About 40 percent of Americans believe that creationist accounts of earthorigins should be taught in public schools instead of evolution, which is afundamental concept of modern science. And 65 percent think that some formof the Old Testament creation story should be taught side by side with evolution.In comparison, nearly all of the scientists I surveyed think that evolutionis the best explanation we have for the development of life on earth. As debatesabout teaching intelligent design in public school classrooms intensify, outspokenscientists have lashed out, perhaps angered by what they see as an outrightattack on evolution. 17But “much more needs to be done by scientists . . . to overcome public indifferenceor outright hostility to science,” according to noted political scientistSanford Lakoff.18It is clear that scientists at elite universities do shoulder theresponsibility of translating science to the broader American public. But thispublic includes a great many religious people. Beyond their own personal attitudestoward religion, scientists in my research revealed that they know littleabout how their own colleagues came to their views on religion, much lessabout what drives a typical American worshipper. Secular scientists need betterinformation—including a more informed grounding in the basics of theworld’s major faith traditions—to think through how to engage the believingpublic and religious scientists about matters of faith. Without this knowledgeto serve as a bridge, boundaries can’t be crossed, the benefits of common dialogueare wasted, and potential allies for science remain untapped within areligious public.Americans have placed science on a precarious throne. In one sense, theyknow that they benefit immensely from it. They immunize their children, enjoythe benefits of technology, and clamor for new discoveries and breakthroughs.Yet at times they mistrust the very scientists from whom they expect miraclecures, especially when it comes to issues such as embryonic stem cell research,environmental degradation, and the origins and development of life. Debatesaround these issues sometimes leave much of the American public with theimpression that scientists do not think enough about the potential ethicalimplications of their work. And this impression can have very negativeconsequences for science. Even with a more science-friendly administration in