A good posting about a recent Nature (!!!) article about Science and Religion. Personally, I subscribe to Stephen Jay Gould’s idea of the two as “Nonoverlapping magisteria.”
I was frankly surprised to see the pages of Nature occupied by an extremely lame and pointless attempt to not only accommodate science and religion, but assert that religion is in some ways better. The short essay, which at least by citation seems to have appeared in the print issue of the journal, is called “Sometimes science must give way to religion,” and was written by Daniel Sarewitz, described as “co-director of the Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes at Arizona State University, [based] in Washington DC."
As far as I can tell, Sarewitz made a trip to Angkor Wat in Cambodia, saw the temples, and had an epiphany that led him to realize that both science and religion are based on faith, and that religion can answer the Big Questions that elude science. This is based on the following statements:
- “Visitors to the Angkor temples in…
View original post 1,570 more words