Jerry Coyne is an esteemed evolutionary biologist. But, together with
the other New Atheists, he vehemently berates religion in a way that
can detract from his important work of explaining evolution to the
layperson.
In his latest post on the topic, he promotes the false belief that there is a fundamental conflict between science and religion, and he even makes the wild (and admittedly unproven) claim “that had there been no Christianity, if after the fall of Rome atheism had pervaded the Western world, science would have developed earlier and be far more advanced than it is now.” (For some thoughts on that theory, see this post.)
Historians have long realized that the great conflict between science and religion is a myth. But it continues to be an article of faith among the New Atheists. In contrast to his views on evolution, Dr. Coyne thinks that he can ignore the evidence from history and disregard the settled view of experts in the field. But, being a scholar and a rational man, we’re sure that he will change his mind if shown to be wrong.
So let’s examine some of the reasons Dr. Coyne presents for rejecting the consensus view of historians that Christianity has generally been supportive of science (notwithstanding some quarrels along the way)........................................................................................................................................
Continued, here.
In his latest post on the topic, he promotes the false belief that there is a fundamental conflict between science and religion, and he even makes the wild (and admittedly unproven) claim “that had there been no Christianity, if after the fall of Rome atheism had pervaded the Western world, science would have developed earlier and be far more advanced than it is now.” (For some thoughts on that theory, see this post.)
Historians have long realized that the great conflict between science and religion is a myth. But it continues to be an article of faith among the New Atheists. In contrast to his views on evolution, Dr. Coyne thinks that he can ignore the evidence from history and disregard the settled view of experts in the field. But, being a scholar and a rational man, we’re sure that he will change his mind if shown to be wrong.
So let’s examine some of the reasons Dr. Coyne presents for rejecting the consensus view of historians that Christianity has generally been supportive of science (notwithstanding some quarrels along the way)........................................................................................................................................
Continued, here.
No comments:
Post a Comment