Summary Session IV Science & Religion

The primary material covered was a brief recap of the influence of Darwin’s theory of Evolution on the division of opinion regarding the age of the earth, man’s creation by God and other claims of the Bible (see slide). Scientists opposed to Darwin’s theory, e.g., Louis Agassiz, Carl Linnaeus, were mentioned in regard to being ostracized by their peers for their position. The frequency of Evolutionary Theism among scientists holding religious belief, e.g., Francis Collins, was discussed as was Evolutionary Psychology and Cognitive studies in religion. (Attached web sites).

A film was shown on the Kemitz vs. Dover trial in 2005 where members of the Dover, PA town sued the Dover school board for imposing the study of “Intelligent Creation” on the school curriculum. The judge ultimately ruled in favor of the plaintiffs that this theory was not scientific, but rather a religious claim, and hence could not be taught in Dover schools. The case was discussed in class in relation to the political strategy of the conservative Christian defendants and their strategy, driven by a Creationism “think tank” to replace Evolutionary theory with Creative Design in American schools. This case was an example of the persistence of a large segment of American society, Christian Fundamentalists and Evangelicals, to continue to believe in the inerrancy of the Bible and reject Evolutionary theory.

Most of the balance of class time dealt with scientific atheism and the respective positions of Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett and Christopher Hichens (See slides for summary). In the case of these four well known scientific atheists, Evolutionary Theory was clearly the common driver in their atheism with a rigid adherence to scientific theory in relation to both religion and science. There has been much criticism of these four related to logical errors, e.g., Evolutionary Theory negates the existence of God. In the past years since publication of their books there has been considerable criticism regarding the apparent narrowness and rigidity of their arguments.

Next session we will cover different schools of thought regarding the potential of science and religion to find some common ground. We will also cover the opposed theological positions of Christian scientists, theologians and philosophers, e.g., Charles Coulson, Arthur Peacock and Wolfhart Pannenburg.

Web sites of interest: https://owlcation.com/social-sciences/The-Cognitive-Science-of-Religion cognitive science of religion. https://slife.org/evolutionary-psychology-of-religion/ Evolutionary psychology of religion (also see Wiki) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Coulson Example of scientist with contra view to atheistic scientific arguments.

SCROLL DOWN FRO SLIDES.