Can Science + Religion Co-Exist?

[dreadfulpenny81]

The answer is YES.

A recent study from Rice University indicates that 15% of scientists at major research universities see science and religion in constant conflict.
They interviewed a scientifically selected sample of 275 participants, pulled from a survey of 2,198 tenured and tenure-track faculty in the natural and social sciences at 21 elite U

Comments

[underlankers]

1) Science is a way of viewing the natural world, religion makes claims about the supernatural in almost all cases. That's a pretty clear case of West (science) is West, East (religion) is East, and ne'er the twain shall meet. Until we find the skulls of demons or angels there's no proof either exists.

2) Not if they adhere to the scientific method, no.

3) It won't change the fundamentalists who see science as a conspiracy to cover up that their religion is the fundamental basis of the Universe one way or another.

[underlankers]

And to further emphasize point 3, the fundamentalists who see real science as a conspiracy theory are not always necessarily religious. Lysenkoism is a perfect secular equivalent to Creationism: Augean pile of bullshit that edits reality to agree with it especially when Reality is screaming "Dude, WTF, stop this acid trip now you dumbass".

[paedraggaidin]

What oportet said. The notion that "science" and "religion" are two diametrically-opposed binary concepts and never the twain shall meet is ridiculous.

[eracerhead]

1. Do you agree/disagree with Aronowitz's observation

[mahnmut]

Unlike religion or politics, science will mercilessly pursue the evidence with repeated experiments.

Other than that, are they compatible? Well, anything is compatible, we're humans after all. Yesterday I learned that onion is compatible with strawberry jam (or so I was told), but meh. It'd be kinda weird and maybe a little, um, how was the word believers like to use... oh yes, "unnatural" to try.

[mahnmut]

I mean... What distinguishes science and religion is critical thinking. Investigation. Self-dissection. It's a merciless process that's at the core of the former and is the complete antithesis of the latter.

[harry_beast]

The scientific community to battles over funding, PR campaigns for competing theories, grudges, personal animosity and political influence. Scientists may not be as pure as you think, though I agree with the "merciless" part.

[mahnmut]

Scientists are humans? Daaaarwiiiiiin!!1

[harry_beast]

1. No, I don't. Few people who would be influenced by such a claim, and they are probably beyond salvage anyway.
2. Not at all. Here is another statistic: 100% of scientists are human beings and are therefore vulnerable to bias, preconceived notions, social pressure, personal agendas, etc. Purging people with spiritual beliefs from research positions will not improve the quality of science; it would probably have the opposite effect, in fact.
3. Maybe it will help people to understand the limits of science, but I'm not holding my breath.