The Big Questions - God
By Mark Vernon on Friday, September 30 2011, 11:15 - Personal observations - Permalink
I've just finished the manuscript for a book in Quercus' The Big Questions series, the one on God.
Reading it through, I realised one of the running questions is why science seems to be encouraging new spiritual exploration and enquiry, more than undermining it. There's the way a scientific attention to the world can develop a mode of perception that naturally provokes wonder. There's the way science is often counterintuitive, much as many spiritual practices discern counterintuitive perceptions of reality. Or there's the humility science can instill, which is not dissimilar to the notion that the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom.
So, I was interested to read that the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion has just published research suggesting that 70% of scientists believe religion and science are only sometimes in conflict; that 68% of scientists surveyed consider themselves spiritual to some degree; and that non-religious scientists typically think highly of their religious colleagues.
Comments
John Gray had an interesting piece on the Beeb recently about the science v. religion debate:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-...
This reference gives a unique understanding of the Big questions, especially God, and the relationship between science and religion.
http://science-and-religion.avatar-...
Here is John Henry Newman, speaking to your point about science requiring humility (or rather, saying that religion cultivates virtues like intellectual humility that are of value in scientific enquiry): http://www.newmanreader.org/works/o... .
That sermon is one of his earliest attempts to look at the relationship between 'faith' and 'reason'; his views deepened over the years. But it is an interesting attempt. Looking at modes of thought in terms of 'virtues' rather than simply 'methods' seems productive.
Thanks particularly for the Newman reference. I shall think about that.
This quotation from Elizabeth Lloyd Mayer's book, _Extraordinary Knowing_, seems apt in this context: "Reading the _Skeptical Inquirer_ was like reading a fundamentalist religious tract. I found the journal dismayingly snide, regularly punctuated by sarcasm, self-congratulation, and nastiness, all parading as reverence for true science." (page 93)