Tuesday, June 11, 2013
The Religious Beliefs Of Scientists
It's common for atheists and other critics of Christianity to point to the irreligiosity of scientists as evidence against religion. In a recent thread at this blog, an atheist commenter claimed that atheists make up 93% of the scientific community in the United States. William Lane Craig addressed such claims during the June 2 edition of his Reasonable Faith podcast. Also, see Paul Manata's comments on pages 42-44 of The Infidel Delusion.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It's often pointed out by atheists that the best and the brightest scientists are overwhelmingly atheist and that this can be shown by the percentage of atheists in the National Academy of Sciences. However, I read somewhere that members are elected by existing members. If that's the case (as this link suggests), then it's no wonder that the majority are atheists. Obviously, atheistic members will tend to nominate and elect fellow atheistic scientists to become new members.
ReplyDeleteAs the link says, there is no application process since new members are unilaterally elected.
DeleteThere are other factors that can help explain why scientists (at least at the present time/age) tend to be atheists (even assuming that the best and the brightest scientists tend to be atheists).
ReplyDelete1. Since the popularity of Darwinism in the late 19th century, academia has tended to be atheistic (especially in the sciences). So, it's no wonder that when classes are taught with an atheistic spin by atheistic professors, that impressionable and admiring students tend to convert to atheism. Darwinism became popular because of inferences and interpretations made of scientific data that was discovered in the 19th century. But such atheistic interpretations wouldn't have been as easily accepted if they knew back then the scientific data now being uncovered in the 21st century (think of the whole intelligent design movement and how it's challenging Neo-Darwinism).
2. Given what the Bible says about our natural sinfulness and aversion to God, is it any wonder that intelligent and self-sufficient (from a human perspective) people tend to deny the existence of God when they sinfully refuse to see all the subtle ways God has blessed them and given them success? There's a self-reinforcing ignorance and blindness going on. Deep in their hearts they don't want to see God's providential handiwork and so they blind themselves further so that they will continue not to see it. That coupled with how methodological naturalism and the autonomous sinful man's desire of mastering his environment (through physics, chemistry and other natural sciences) perfectly meshes to create self-consciously professing and asserting atheists and metaphysical naturalists.
3. If unconditional election is true (as Augustinianism and Calvinism teach), then God tended to elect a greater percentage of those who would not be as naturally gifted in Common Grace blessings (which include high intelligence) as others. In which case, those who are highly intelligent will tend not to be among those who are regenerate in this world. Compare the Biblical passage of 1 Cor. 1:26-31.
4. It might well be the case that people with more well rounded intelligence and/or certain personality types tend to go into fields outside of science (e.g. business, finance, law, leadership positions, politics, public relations type fields etc.) because they have abilities that people who tend to go into science tend not to have. For example, people skills; leadership skills; adaptability to changing environments, circumstances and data; communication skills et cetera. Whereas, some people who prefer the safety of fixed data (or at least generally stable theories), of controlled environments, of abstract thinking and procedural thinking (and technical processes) tend to enter scientific fields.
We also have to consider the fact that the distribution of atheists in the various scientific fields isn't uniform. While certain scientific fields tend to be filled with atheists, others will be more open to "a higher power", or deism, or theism or even Christian theism. It's not surprising that biologists, anthropologists, paleontologists tend to be atheistic. But microbiologists (for example) are more open to the possibility of intelligent design than the the former list of scientific fields because of the amazing complexity and apparent design in their own field. Similarly, I've heard Hugh Ross say a number of times that there are many Christians in the astrophysicist community because of many instances of the apparent manifestation of the anthropic principle they often find in nature (and especially in their own field).
DeleteThe sad and ironic thing of highly intelligent people becoming atheists is that the very thing that makes them especially reflective of the Image of God is the very thing that they use to distance themselves from the God who gave them such intellectual blessings. So that the more God has given to them, the more they want to live ungratefully and unthankfully. Rather than acknowledging the source of their (literally) god-like (because God given) powers. When I think of the many geniuses and prodigies who have existed in times past and present and their amazing abilities, I can't help but be confirmed in my belief in the existence of God. These are people with amazing (seemingly supernatural) mathematical skills, memories, musical talents, etc.
Here's a List of Child Prodigies
Arguing that atheist scientists are evidence of the veracity of atheism is a non-sequitor. Believing it is evidence that atheism is irrational.
ReplyDelete...or more accurately that atheists are irrational.
Delete