Eugenie Scott plays an important political role in trying to
keep creationism/ID out of the government schools. But on
Dec 2, she gave a presentation at the University of Colorado
on the topic of Life on Mars and Religion (or so I hear).
During this presentation, Scott allegedly argued that if we did find
life on Mars, or anywhere else, religion would be forced
to come to terms with this and perhaps make readjustments.
She also noted that this is more true of some religions than
others (Hinduism/Buddhism would be less concerned than
Christianity/Judaism/Islam).
Now, if you think this through, one begins to suspect that
the notion of government schools being neutral on the
issue of religion is an illusion.
First, Scott asserts that finding life on other planets would
have an effect on Christian theology. But how can this be?
We have long been told by many authorities in the scientific
field that religion and science are completely separate.
But if they were completely separate, there would be no
reason whatsoever to anticipate religious reactions to scientific
findings. Thus, it is simply irrational to argue on one hand
that the two realms are completely different, but on the other
hand, argue that religion will need to adjust to scientific claims.
But it is true, as Scott noted, that Hinduism and Buddhism would
be much less concerned with finding life on other planets. This
is because for these introspective religions, it is more valid to say
that religion and science are totally separate.
The standard way origins is taught in government schools is
to argue that science deals only with the natural world and
religions deals with different issues. Yet if tax-payer money
is used to promote this thinking, isn't it denigrating the
religious views of Christians/Jews/Muslims (whose theology
would have to react to scientific claims yet is excluded from sitting
at the table of scienitific speculation) and promoting
the religious views of Hindus/Buddhists (whose theology is
more in line with the divorce between the physical and
spiritual)?
I'm not interested in flame-war type replies (or mere
posturing). I'm more interested in insightful, open-minded
comments. As I said, I oppose teaching creationism/ID
in government schools, but nevertheless, there still appears
to be a serious problem of subtle favoritism that deserves
attention.
Mike