Religion and Science:
Highly religious Americans are less likely than others to see conflict between faith and science.
BY CARY FUNK AND BECKA A. ALPER
Are science and religion at odds with each other? A majority of the public says science and religion often conflict, with nearly six-in-ten adults (59%) expressing this view in newly released findings from a Pew Research Center survey. The share of the public saying science and religion are often in conflict is up modestly from 55% in 2009, when Pew Research conducted a similar survey on religion and science.
People’s sense that there generally is a conflict between religion and science seems to have less to do with their own religious beliefs than it does with their perceptions of other people’s beliefs. Less than one-third of Americans polled in the new survey (30%) say their personal religious beliefs conflict with science, while fully two-thirds (68%) say there is no conflict between their own beliefs and science.
Moreover, the view that science and religion are often in conflict is particularly common among Americans who are, themselves, not very religiously observant (as measured by frequency of attendance at worship services). Some 73% of adults who seldom or never attend religious services say science and religion are often in conflict. By contrast, among more religiously observant Americans – those who report that they attend religious services on a weekly basis – exactly half (50%) share the view that science and religion frequently conflict.
Click on the news link to read more about the study.
This is hardly surprising when you consider that many of the most vocal and prominent religious figures seen in the media today are anti-science fundamentalists. So even if they are only a small minority of the religious community (which they are) their constant media exposure and repetition of their lunacy creates a skewed view of the world. Nor does it help any that the dominionists have essentially hijacked the Republican party.
I don’t see this as a problem of the vocal minority. Everyone who actually joins a church takes a pledge. Almost all use the same words that were finalized in 381 AD, modern translation of course. It says Jesus was born of a virgin and saved us from sin. Other religions have similar membership requirements. If you think changing that is non-controversial, look up Greta Vosper who did just that and is now being investigated by her church elders. Church leaders want to keep those things, if they don’t, then they have to completely reconsider what church is. Most people who go to church don’t believe the creeds 100%, but they don’t want to talk about just what they believe or not either. They know there is a conflict, but they won’t go so far as to say nothing supernatural exists, so the conflict persists. They are worried, like the Church was in 1277, that allowing reason in will destroy them.
I don't see this as a problem of the vocal minority. Everyone who actually joins a church takes a pledge. Almost all use the same words that were finalized in 381 AD, modern translation of course. It says Jesus was born of a virgin and saved us from sin. Other religions have similar membership requirements. If you think changing that is non-controversial, look up Greta Vosper who did just that and is now being investigated by her church elders. Church leaders want to keep those things, if they don't, then they have to completely reconsider what church is. Most people who go to church don't believe the creeds 100%, but they don't want to talk about just what they believe or not either. They know there is a conflict, but they won't go so far as to say nothing supernatural exists, so the conflict persists. They are worried, like the Church was in 1277, that allowing reason in will destroy them.They were right. It has. It's just taken an inordinately long time to kick in. Lois
To me, part of the problem is that the survey is only showing that if you ask someone something about which they know very little (science) and if it is in conflict with something else of which they know very little (their religion), it is easy to say there is no conflict.
If one knows a lot about science and a lot about religion, the only logical conclusion they should be able to arrive at is that the one (science) consistently refutes the other. No one who is a scientist should be able to truthfully say that they are also religious (since it is inherent that you are contradicting yourself; i.e. I believe in evidence and at the same time I don’t believe in evidence).