Translate

Showing posts with label Huygens. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Huygens. Show all posts

Thursday, June 4, 2009

Scientists and religion

Views of some prominent scientists on God and religion

From Broca’s Brain by Carl Sagan, 1979, Ballantine Books, New York pages 329-41
Sagan believes that religion should be subject to skepticism just like theories of UFOs or other superstitions. He believes that any belief system should be able to withstand critical scrutiny, testing and skepticism. Religion he believes should not be immune from this and any belief system that cannot withstand such scrutiny should be discarded. He recognized that doctrinal religions might feel threatened by the pursuit of knowledge (e.g. Moslems feeling threatened after the first moon landings since the moon has a very special place in their religion). People inherit their religion and do not necessarily think too deeply or critically about their religion. Searching questions can make them feel uncomfortable.
Sagan quotes Christainus Huygens who, in a book written in 1670, speculated about other planets in the solar system. Huygens warned his contemporaries, who found such speculation objectionable, that they presume too much responsibility in presuming to know the limits God has set for man’s search for knowledge and how men should choose to pursue this search. Such people should not presume to know what God has chosen to be revealed to man and what is not to be revealed. Had man limited his pursuit of knowledge, said Huygens, we might never have found out about the nature of the Earth and of the existence of the continent of America.

Sagan mentions that our universe is not benignly quiet and that cataclysmic phenomena occur almost constantly. He describes that, for instance, an explosion of a quasar in the universe could likely destroy millions of worlds including countless life forms (maybe some even intelligent). The very scale of the universe ( e.g. more than a hundred billion galaxies, each containing a hundred billion stars) shows us how inconsequential human events on our planet can be seem in the cosmic context. What kind of God does such a universe require (Western or eastern?) Is a God even required? Sagan believes that the pursuit of knowledge is consistent for both science and religion. If there is a God then we are using our God given gifts to pursue knowledge. If there is no God, then our gifts of curiosity and intelligence are our tools to manage our (man’s) survival.
Sagan describes Einstein's belief in "Spinoza's" God who reveals himself in the harmony of all being, not in the God who concerns himself with the fate and actions of men.
From Human Instinct by Robert Winston, 2003, Bantam Books, London, pages 372-392
Winston mentions that our ethical attitudes can only be as good as our understanding of the world around us (e.g the observation in 1694 by Hartsoeker of a homunculus in human sperm leading a rabbi (Rabbi Elijah ben Meir) to write in 1790 to say that destruction of the sperm was equivalent to murder). He draws a parallel between the outdated and cruel and morally outdated Code of Hammurabi and religious or ethical views that are based on false premises, faulty observation or flawed data; both being valueless and misleading. He mentions however that misguided scientists are no better (e.g. eugenics).
Richard Dawkins
Richard Dawkins wrote in the Guardian after the Sep 11 2001 attack and destruction of the World Trade Center in N.Y. and the Penatagon in Washington D.C. that the cause of the attacks was religion of the “Abrahamic kind.” Winston takes issue with this by answering that all of the moral and ethical values we all hold dearly today are based on these religions and that there were other causes, not purely religious, for the attacks (as are Hamas terrorists attacking Israeli civilians in Tel Aviv being more a political then religious attacks).
Richard Dawkins is is very outspoken against both organized and disorganized religion. In a Devil’s Chaplain (under the chapter “Infected Minds.”). Dawkins, as a scientist, is against strongly accepting any belief without proof.. Religious beliefs are not tested with the same rigor as are scientific theories.