Although I missed it when it was news, I recently noticed the passing of one of the more influential New Atheists, often called "the fifth horseman"
among them, Victor Stenger, of a heart attack at age 79.
Stenger was a physics processor who made it his task to show the
superiority of the modern scientific worldview over religion. authoring a number
of books dedicated to the effort, including a New York Times bestseller,
God: The Failed Hypothesis: How Science Shows That God Does Not
Exist. Among his other notable titles were Not by Design: The Origin of
the Universe, Has Science Found God? The Latest Results in the Search for
Purpose in the Universe, God and the Folly of Faith: The Incompatibility of
Science and Religion, and God and the Atom.
He was well-known for his saying-turned-into-teeshirt-slogan: "Science
flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings." Which in my humble
opinion is an oversimplification at best. One sympathetic towards religion might
respond in kind: Religion brings comfort in times of trouble. Science created
nuclear weapons. Maybe both true so far as they go, but neither going far
enough.
Two things I'm not fond of: using science as a defense against religion;
using science to bolster religion. My feeble effort to make my way though this great divisive issue is to recognize a compatibility of science with either
religious and non-religious attitudes.
The problem I have with the New Atheists is that they seem forevermore the
counterpart of the religious fundamentalist. It seems to me biologist Rupert
Sheldrake states it accurately in his book Science Set Free (page 328):
Much of the hypocrisy of science comes from assuming the mantle
of absolute truth, which is a relic of the ethos of absolute religious and
political power when mechanistic science was born. Of course, there are
disagreements among scientists, and the sciences are continually changing and
developing. But a monopoly of truth remains the ideal. Dissenting voices are
heretical. Fair public debates are alien to the culture of the
sciences.
The "fifth horseman" did speak powerfully for those who want to use science
as "the mantle of absolute truth," especially for arguing atheism. But I'm one
of those who feel skeptical about the human ability to discern "absolute truth."
I say that with regard to religious or spiritual authority as well.
I do disagree with New Atheism, especially as expressed by Stenger in 2012,
that religion "is and always has been a blight on humanity that has hindered our
progress for millennia and now threatens our very existence." I think that
describes religious extremism. But Stenger and his companions go beyond battling
religious extremism, I think, to the point of reaching the opposite
extreme.
Dr. Stenger's influence will far outlive him no doubt. I only wish it had
been dedicated to moderation. Nevertheless, it's hard to deny that a giant has
fallen.
News to me too. I remember once considered buying one of his books. I didn't.
ReplyDeleteIt often isn't talked about but many of our advances in medicine came about with some ugly scenes behind the scenes. The story of Jonas Salk is an example, and I can't quite remember his name right now but the Dr. responsible for cataract surgery. I passed that book on to a friend. The name Charles rings a bell. Should look it up. The Dr. responsible for local anaesthetic also was given a hard time.
I'm not sure why people think there are absolutes. It seems to me absolutes are vulnerable to change. :) If they weren't, we wouldn't have the scientific advances we have and will have.
The science of medicine is one field I have less confidence in than ever before (which isn't to say I renounce it all). Perhaps despite all humankind has thus far been able to discover about the universe, we still are infants in that understanding. If so, perhaps a little more humility would be in order. I agree with you: more advances are on the way.
Delete"Humility." A story I've written maybe in a comment or post. I can't remember anymore.
DeleteWhile still working as an R.N. I had a doctor asked me why I was different than the other nurses. Different? You aren't afraid of us. (The conversation was a bit longer.) I told him that is because they think you are God and I know you aren't.
I've always had the thought that doctors are just like me and everyone else, except they spent many years in school and special training learning their profession. I think people sometimes put scientists on a pedestal, too; yet they are faulty humans just like us, with prejudices, blind spots, and stubborness.
ReplyDelete