Interview with Francis Collins, head of National Institutes of Health (NIH) about religion & science
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/questionofgod/voices/collins.html
What do you think is the proper role between religion & science? Between religion & science & government? For example, should there be public funds supporting scientific research? Why or why not? Should public funds support religion? Why or why not? Can you tie your answer to anything from your History of Evolution book?
First of all, Collins spoke so beautifully in that interview. I enjoyed hearing his story and seeing how he changed his mind and how science and religion don't have to oppose each other, rather they compliment each other.
ReplyDeleteI believe that religion and science are intertwined together. Collins says that in the creation of the universe, some one had to get the ball rolling, it makes sense that God is the one how started everything. Of course there is the creation story in Genesis, but I don't believe it is literal because then it would that science is wrong or incorrect. The Bible is a religious document, not a scientific one. In medicine, medicine is often dominated by science. We have a prescription to combat disease and illness. But sometimes there are things that medicine and doctors cannot fix but some how the body works in mysterious ways or by means of a miracle. The doctors are dumb founded at how the patient survived and the only logical reason is because of God.
The public should support scientific research, as long as it is ethical. Many people on a daily basis benefit from what scientists have discovered either recently or in the past. But the issue with the public supporting religion, is that there are various religious beliefs. Catholics, Methodists, Baptist, and Protestants all believe in God and are Christians but they share slightly different beliefs. It is't fair or right to say one is better than the other, therefore they get more funding money. Its like comparing apples, bananas, and oranges. They are all fruit and they are all healthy snacks but you can't justify one being more healthy than the other. Each has its own set of nutritional values.
I really like your comment about how the human body works in mysterious way and can heal itself without medicine and the only thing to do is thank God. I also like how you mentioned the many different religions and how no one is better then each other so no religion should have more of a public fund.
DeleteVery well put Lauren! I like the way that you compared all religions as to fruits because they are all different. Their creation stories and the book they read are different too! The bible is meant for a spiritual satisfaction and for us to follow it not as a history book, but a book of stories filled with metaphors.
DeleteI also really liked how Collins changed his mind about how science and relation don't have to oppose each other, rather they compliment each other. I thought this was a real breakthrough for science considering these two concepts have been battling it out for the past centuries. I also liked how you mentioned that the Bible is a religious document, not a scientific one. I agree with this and believe that more people should realize that the Bible is not supposed to be taken literally, rather it should be taken as guidelines.
DeleteI personally believe that science and religion are connected in some ways. In the beginning of the creation of life, I feel that God had to create the first things on earth. Science my have taken the evolution part so form new species and kingdoms of animals, but as I mentioned before that had to be created to be put on earth. I personally feel that science should be funded by the public. With public funding we maybe able to experiment more and find out more answers. If we only do private funding with minimal public funds, scientist are only going to put out results that help these big companies due to the funding. It is unfair to show results only due to the fact that a company helped these scientist with funds. My thought on religious funding money is that it should only be donations. When you attend church a basket goes around and money is donated to that church. I don't think any religion should have more money due to public funding. I feel like this goes back to chapter one of evolution and how people believed God created everything and how evolution did not take place. This also goes back to Darwin and how he did not publish his work because it went against religious beliefs and he did not want to upset his family with his work.
ReplyDeleteI like your examples from the book Evolution! I agree with you about science and religion being connected in ways. I agree that God was the creator of all living things and then science came in and led the path to what we have today. The reproduction of animals, the evolution of species, and so on. Religion will always be a part of science because scientists have different religions and have different beliefs. I agree that science should be publically funded, because when you have these private funders the scientists are going to do research on what these companies are paying them to look for, and then that's the only data the public receives. Instead science should be publically funded so researchers can focus on find new things out that will help the public, not just these big companies.
DeleteI like the way you said that religion and science are connected in some way. I believe the same thing that God could have created the first things on earth and as time lapsed we evolved bringing the theory of evolution into motion. i believe going back to the very first life on earth God could have had a hand in helping the beginning of life forms on earth, i dont necessarily like that the world trys to portray such a black and white discussion of science or evolution. i believe they should be taught separately and everyone has the right to decide for themselves because in the end nobody necessarily knows for sure.
DeleteThe proper role between religion and science is to be aware of both. If children grow up believing in a religion, they should also be taught science. If a child grows up unreligious, they should also be aware of what others believe and it might not always match up to their beliefs. Science Religion and Government pose an important debate because science is funded by the government where as religion is not. I feel that this should be the way science and religion work because religion is not about funding, it is about being a good person and having moral beliefs, not getting money. I think there should be public funds for science but not religion because science is something that always needs answers. Questions and hypotheses are arising therefore we need the funding to carry those out. With religion though, donations should be sufficient for parishes or individual churches, mosques, or any place of worship. My church does just fine with it’s donations and never tells people they have to pay this amount of money. I think for us as religious people, we should be accepting of everyone, no matter what financial status they are in. If we start making people pay their church, to me, it defeats why we want to go there in the first place.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Sarah. I dont think we should limit or force a child to only believe one thing over another. As unfortunate as it is, it almost seems like every mass I go to our priest always asks for donations. That is not the way it should be, it's almost a turn off for me to go to my parish anymore because the homily shouldnt be based around trying to get money. The public and government should keep funding science because with science we may be able to discover new elements and or discover cures for other diseases. On a side note, last time I checked, the government severly limited funding for NASA. I believe NASA needs to be allotted more money so we can keep increasing our knowledge of the unknown.
DeleteSarah, I like how you mentioned that the key role to religion and science is to be aware of the both of then. I attended a catholic school from kindergarten through 12th grade and through all those years there is one comment my 8th grade teacher told me that lead me to believe what I believe today: "Gods plan was for evolution". Ever since she told me that I have believed in that statement to be true for me. That is why I liked how Collins said they should both compliment each other rather than oppose each other. I also like how you mentioned that science, religion, and government pose an important debate since science is funded by the government while religion is not. I think this is due to the many different religions we have in this country and funding one religion, or even funding many but forgetting a few, could cause serious problems in this country.
DeleteSarah, I agree 100%! We can't force anyone to believe that one way is right. I personally was taught about creation and Genesis and God creating man. But at the same time if God created all the animals at one time, then evolution doesn't quite work, but there is proof of evolution in fossils and rocks. That's where there needs to be a separation of Church and Science.
DeleteI think that you are absolutely right when you say that people should be aware of both science and religion. I also grew up Catholic and went to catholic grade school and high school and I am a little upset I don't know too much about science and evolution. I think that kids should be taught both of these subjects because they are each extremely important and are big influences in a lot of peoples lives. People should be able to blend the two in certain ways that they see fit and not everyone is going to believe everything that another person might believe and I think that is what makes topics like this interesting. I also think that science should be funded while religion should be donations for the same reasons why you think so too. Religion is supposed to be about giving and not receiving, while science is more about research and trying to find cures for diseases.
DeleteI really liked this Article. I liked seeing the transformation of his thinking as the interview went on. He eventually grew deeper in his thinking and was able to connect science and a higher power. I liked when he said, "I reject the comments that people make sometimes like the fact that a flower is blooming is a miracle. I don't think so. That's a matter that science can actually explain. How did you go from that seed to that blooming flower? I can answer that. Now, why did the seed exist in the first place? That, perhaps, is a miracle. We don't really know how the universe got here." He did not see science as a religion as some scientist do, but he imposed a deeper meaning to science. Connecting science and religion is subjective, one cannot prove there is a higher power.
ReplyDeleteI believe science is merely EVIDENCE of a higher power. In my mind, there is no way the "universe" got it right the first time. Gravity is a at a perfect speed for orbit. If the acceleration of gravity changed, orbit would not be possible. Scientist believe they can explain how everything came to be with the big bang theory but that is just explaining the evolution of everything that already was. If everything came from a small ball of energy, where did that ball of energy come from? Collins ties into this type of thought in the article. I enjoyed this article and liked Collins' ideas.
I liked the way that Collins explained the concept that trying to apply empiricism to faith is in most cases futile. Faith is the process of believing in something without the basis of proof or all of the facts, so to try to apply an approach of analysis based only on provable facts does not make sense at all. I also liked how he explained his conversion process through the help of C.S. Lewis' 'Mere Christianity,' and the specific example of the concept of Moral Law. I do not see a reason why religion and science cannot co-exist. It was stated that Theology can be viewed as the missing link in our understanding of the world. (What started the big bang, what started the process of evolution, etc.) Collins even says that "God gave us an opportunity through science to understand the natural world, but there will never be a scientific proof of God's existence." I do not think that religion of any kind should be forced on anyone though. In the United States we have separation of church and state, but I do not think this is meant to completely stricken the public eye of anything religious since there are obvious religious references in our government dating back to the founding fathers. (The Constitution was written on the basis of Natural Law from a God-centered worldview.) Since government power and legislation are based on a mandate from the masses, obviously if there is a majority of people that fit the religious demographic you will find these elements all around you. I think that this topic ties to the Evolution Book closely with Chapter Nine - "America's Anti-Evolution Crusade." This chapter deals with the Scopes-Monkey Trial, and the debate over whether or not Evolution should be permitted to be taught in public schools.
ReplyDeleteThis was a very interesting article that made Collins a scientist who never thought about religion slowly get deeper into his thoughts about religion. He wanted to know more. What I believe the proper role between science and religion is that they are connected. It is just some people believe that certain things happen because of evolution and then certain people believe it is spiritual or it is God that has caused mysterious things to happen. I believe the government is more involved with science. Such as discovering things through multiple test and observations such as Cancer or other diseases. When it comes to religion the government stays away from those things. You never see a big headline on religious based creation. It seems the government does not like to get into that which is understandable simply because of the multiple religions and different spiritual beliefs that everyone might have. I do believe that there should be public funds to support science simply because we need to keep testing for cures of all the different diseases that we have in the world. We also need it so we can go farther and continue to expand our findings of things that we might not know existed. This will help us to stay informed. I am religious I do believe in God but I really am not sure if we necessarily need public funds like we do for science. I believe that we do need some so that we can expand the education of religion and how Earth really began. But like I said earlier it is hard with religion simply because there are so many different religions out there. How do we know which religion is true or which one might be incorrect. The public could fund for religion in general but that would not really be helping anyone and there beliefs.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you OT, that this article was very interesting. I found it shocking that Collins went from a man who grew up atheist and converted to Christianity. When dealing with science it seems to be more common for people to doubt their beliefs in God then to gain them. I believe that the proper role between science and religion is to teach the students both. They should not be left clueless to science and the concept of evolution just because they go to a Catholic school, or just because they go to a public school they shouldn't be taught strictly evolution. I believe that God created the earth and put everything he did on it, and then science took over and evolved his creations. When it comes to the role of government funding for science, I completely support it. The findings in science help the common good of the world, such as a new cure in medicine. I do think that the government shouldn't fund religion though. The churches are doing fine with the donations of the Parrish. Money isn't needed to worship God.
DeleteI agree with you that religion should remain private and science should be publicly funded.This is because religion is a set of beliefs and some have not changed for years. There is not much religious research to fund but there is an abundance of scientific research that needs funding. Scientific research has made advances that have benefited everyone.
DeleteInteresting article, Collins finds himself thinking deeper into the other realm (religion). If you had to ask my opinion on it though, religion to me is a pleasure,for lack of a better word, it should remain private, while science should absolutely be publicly funded.. Science is proven, religion, although very helpful, the history and the stories aren't necessarily fact. Religion is a stepping stone to live a decent life told through stories and fables to get a point across. Scientific research needs to be funded to continue our species and others on this earth. When you start mixing religion and science AND the government together, thats when you have issues, morally and factually.
ReplyDeleteI love your post Ian. I also believe that religion is something that should be private and not pushed on others.
DeleteI think religion and science seek to explain two different things. Science explains what has happened, what is happening, and what is going to happen. Religion seeks to explain the bigger picture behind all of this. I don't think that they should interfere with each other, or ever attempt to. It is up to each person to believe what they want though, and it is not up to me to say who's right or wrong.
ReplyDeletePersonally i am not a religious person, i am not an atheist but i dont associate myself with a single religion i kind of believe in a little bit of everything. This makes it easy for me to say that science is imperative to the evolution of our species, where as religion is more of guidelines to live a righteous life. I believe humans need something bigger than ourselves to believe in, therefore we have religions. Science and religion should be kept completely separate, one is dealing with beliefs and the other is explain the empirical world and what has is and will happen. Government and the public should help fund science because it is the key to the next step of evolution of the human species.
ReplyDeleteCompletely agree with you Ford. I categorize myself the same way as you, just not really involved with religion. This also makes it easy for me to agree with evolution and also understand that the Bible was written to lead you on a holy path for life. Science and religion should be thought of separately. Religion doesnt explain why an earthquake happens, but science can. Also, science cant explain how the very first human beings were, but the Bible can give a description to us. They are completely separate studies of different things.
DeleteHonestly as a Christian I found this article to me interesting because it show that the fields of science and religion can come together as exemplified by Francis Collins successful career. I think religion is intended to be a moral compass for living life. He suggests that evolution is the tool used by God in his creation of the world. While I completely disagree with evolution due to my specific believes I can acknowledge the different roles of science and religion in their nature.
DeleteScience and religion should never be talked about in the same category. I would agree with many, however that some believe in God and his creation of the world and then evolution took over from there. I would agree with Jensen here that religion doesn't explain why things happen in the world like earthquakes, volcanoes, tornadoes, etc. and science can explain all that. While religion sets up good guidelines for how a person should live, science can explain why many other things occur Religion and science are two totally separate studies and need to stay separated.
ReplyDeleteThis interview was beautifully spoken by Collins, By sharing his own experience of his faith and his role in the human genome project he is trying to say that science and religion can be compatible, the that they forced choice between the two is actually a false dichotomy. As Collins says one must realize that science operates in the realm of the natural and that religion operates in the realm of the supernatural. Specially Collins attacks the battle between the proponents of evolution and those of creationists by suggesting that evolution was the natural tool used for the supernatural process of God's creation of the world. This battle has been going every since the Scopes Money Trial that was discussed in our evolution book where it was question whether evolution should be taught in the US schools The issue of federal funding has become an issue discussed in recent blog post, specifically the pressure placed on the scientists who are funded by the federal government to produce positive results. This can lead to added pressure by scientists to falsifiable or influence the results of data analysis to maintain their funding Nevertheless government funding is necessary because it gives funds to scientists doing research on important, impactful fields. Government should bit fund religious activity because one it would be a violation of the first amendment as a implication of the US implication of an official state religion also it would create a greater atmosphere for religious tension and persecution than there already is. I as man of Christian faith I greatly enjoyed this article.
ReplyDeleteScience and Religion should not be viewed as enemies but as friends. They compliment each other, as they both search for truth. Science and Religion ask different questions appropriate to each field. They both are pursuing truth
ReplyDelete