Spokane7
50°
November 30, 2009 in Opinion
Science, faith aren’t mutually exclusive
A century and a half after Charles Darwin published “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection,” the overwhelming majority of scientists in the United States accept Darwinian evolution as the basis for understanding how life on Earth developed. But although evolutionary theory is often portrayed as antithetical to religion, it has not destroyed the religious faith of the scientific community.
According to a survey of members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center in May and June this year, a majority of scientists (51 percent) say they believe in God or a higher power, while 41 percent say they do not.
Furthermore, scientists today are no less likely to believe in God than they were almost 100 years ago, when the scientific community was first polled on this issue. In 1914, 11 years before the Scopes “monkey” trial and four decades before the discovery of the structure of DNA, psychologist James Leuba asked 1,000 U.S. scientists about their views on God. He found the scientific community evenly divided, with 42 percent saying that they believed in a personal God and the same number saying they did not.
The scientific community is, however, much less religious than the general public. In Pew surveys, 95 percent of American adults say they believe in some form of deity or higher power.
And the public does not share scientists’ certainty about evolution. While 87 percent of scientists say that life evolved over time due to natural processes, only 32 percent of the public believes this to be true, according to a different Pew poll earlier this year.
If a substantial portion of the scientific community is made up of believers, why do so many people think evolution and religion are incompatible? It may be because some of our most famous and prolific scientists, such as American evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould and British physicist Stephen Hawking, were or are atheists and agnostics. But what about Francis Collins, the former head of the Human Genome Project, who was recently appointed as director of the National Institutes of Health by President Barack Obama? Collins is an evangelical Christian who speaks passionately about his faith – and also thinks evolution is an established scientific fact.
As for Darwin, his letters indicate that he was probably an agnostic who lost his faith not because his groundbreaking theory was incompatible with religion, but because of his grief after the 1851 death of his favorite child, his 10-year-old daughter, Annie. And even then, he may not have completely rejected the idea of a higher power. The concluding sentence of “Origin of Species” speaks of a “Creator” breathing life “into a few forms or into one.” The passage raises at least a little doubt as to how the father of modern evolutionary theory might have responded to the question on belief in Pew’s recent survey of scientists.
David Masci is a senior researcher at the Pew Forum.
Editorial: Workers’ beer routine undermines public trust 
Ninch on November 30 at 8:31 a.m.
The evolution process, genetics, etc. itself puts one in awe and actually can reinforce the idea of a greater power, aka spirituality. I think where the division occurs is in organized religions where “human” leaders advocate opinions within cultural confines and lack of expanded interpretations of religions stories and events. In other words, a too literal view is not necessarily correct. Such literal views mirror the idea that our local Plateau Culture Coyote stories would be direct recollection of facts. Yet, with closer inspection religious stories and myths do have some basis in reality, which some researchers are using to further scientific knowledge, i.e. religion and science are synergistic.
empyrius on November 30 at 9:41 a.m.
Are you trying to say the earth has been around for more than six thousand years?!? Well that does not fit the “literal” Biblical chronology …: evildoers!
Har har har har
Just kidding. I do believe in dinosaurs (that lived 100 million years ago), I do believe in dinosaurs, I do, I do . . .
johnclarke on November 30 at 10:22 a.m.
100% of John Clarke thinks these statistics are suspect.
calvinandhobbes on November 30 at 4:55 p.m.
the world is not billions of years old as most people would claim. darwin himself said in his book The Origin of Species, when he was talking about the way that the human eye focuses, that it seems “Absurd in the highest degree” that such a thing as the eye could evolve.
am91962 on November 30 at 8:05 p.m.
To calvinandhobbes,
I would highly recommend that you read Darwin’s book again. He clearly states in the book just how an eye might have evolved.