Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Marco Masi's avatar

This historical account is fascinating and well-presented. Thank you for sharing it.

The ideological background discussed has certainly shaped our understanding of science to this day. However, I believe that most scientists today no longer identify with it, although there are notable exceptions like Richard Dawkins & co. It is true that within academia, there remains a clear distinction between science and religion, even among scientists who hold religious beliefs. Nonetheless, the practice of biology as a strictly naturalistic discipline does not imply that all biologists view religion as an irreconcilable adversary of science. And, among the biologists I have encountered, none subscribed to social Darwinism. We have made progress since the dogmatic views of religion and Huxley’s equally dogmatic stance. It is true that naturalism still prevails and significantly influences our mindset. Perhaps we can discover a better compromise and achieve greater balance that goes beyond naturalism and beyond religion as well.

Expand full comment
Ms. Billie M. Spaight's avatar

Thank goodness I have never experienced any conflicts in my own heart and mind between religion and science. Our ability to discover scientific breakthroughs is a gift of evolution and evolution is how G-d expresses. I am a fierce progressive who links my progressivism to many Catholic values. While I have left FORMAL religion behind and rejected some of its opinions, I have no doubt at all that G-d exists and is a part of everything and everybody. I suppose this is an eclectic kind of perspective but it all makes sense to me. I never did like "either–or" ways of framing this. Paradox is an essential part of our existence and I feel we would do well to embrace it.

Expand full comment

No posts