29 March 2009

The heart of the debate

Richard Grant channels Stephen Jay Gould in a robust defense of the non-overlap between the magisteria of science and religion. His talking points are that scientists don't understand science (or rather, what science doesn't provide):
The thing is, people often make the mistake of assuming that the faithful invent a religion because they need to explain something—usually the natural world. And while it’s true that religions have and do spring up for this reason, it is not why people are christians.
And (echoing Slacktivist) the religious don't understand theology:
Creationism is used as a proof, as evidence for the existence of (a) God. ... So if you tie your faith to a ‘proof’ you actually end up trying to prove that your proof is true, rather than seeking out ‘truth’. Which is the cleft stick Creationists find themselves in.
Via the Daily Dish.

No comments:

Post a Comment