Apathy on the Question of God
Google Image |
First off, I’m not
promoting the view that science and religion are incompatible. I’m an admirer of science, scientists and the
scientific method but don’t believe it comprises the whole of knowledge nor is
the only way to acquire knowledge. We also observe, test and learn about
reality from art, literature, music, and yes, religion.
As society becomes more
secular, however, more people ignore the benefits and importance of religion.
Unfortunately, the media – my career choice – deserves a lot of the blame. That’s
because the media not only reflect society but help form it. If the media
ignores religion, more of their audiences will, too. And except for big events
like a papal visit, the media pretty much ignore it.
Reflecting Americans' Interests
That doesn’t reflect
Americans’ interests. Seventy-four percent of Americans say they believe in God
and, according to a Harris poll, half of Americans says they are “very” or
“somewhat” religious. Yet, few newspapers, magazines or electronic media
sources have sections or reporters dedicated to news about religion. That
contrasts with the amount of news and dedicated staff dedicated to
politics, in which only 36 percent of Americans are interested, according
to a Gallup poll.
I recently watched the
excellent documentary, “Expedition to the End of the World,” on Netflix about
an expedition to a remote part of Greenland by a crew of scientists, artists
and philosophers on a three-masted schooner.
Much of the dialogue was
about varying points of view among the three professions. One of the scientists
laments that it’s so hard for humanity to accept that there’s nothing beyond this
life. He tries to put a brave face on this observation but isn’t convincing.
Google Image |
The artists and
philosophers provide various ways of accepting, or equivocating about that
observation, but none suggests there may be a God or an afterlife. Ironically,
one of the points of the expedition was to include diverse viewpoints and
professional attitudes, but no one represented faith or theology.
It’s as if faith, held by
the vast majority of the earth’s residents, isn’t worth considering, that
people of faith are too ignorant or gullible to be included. The idea of the
incompatibility of faith and science are so ingrained in both believers and
scientists, and so easily accepted by society, that it’s very hard to shake.
That’s why “The Language of
God, A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief” by Francis Collins, head of the
Human Genome Project and director of the National Institutes of Health, is
interesting. The book includes the story of Collins’ evolution from agnostic
to atheist to believer.
Among the influences that
led him to faith were his scientific observations, including “the elegance of
the human DNA code.” And as he began seeing patients, he was struck by the
resilience and courage of people of faith. “If faith was a psychological
crutch,” he observed, “it must be a very powerful one.”
Faith was not a part of his
early education, but he was blessed with “the priceless gift of the joy of
learning,” and he eventually asked himself, “Could there be a more important
question in all of human existence than ‘Is there a God?’”
Ideas About Faith Those of a Schoolboy
After reading “Mere
Christianity” by the famous British author, C.S. Lewis, he concluded that “all
of my own constructs against the plausibility of faith were those of a
schoolboy.” And he began to see as God-given the idea of right and wrong – no
matter how often ignored – that seems to be firmly implanted in human beings.
Eventually, he writes,
“faith in God now seemed more rational than disbelief.” But, he concluded, “If
God exists, then He must be outside the natural world, and therefore the tools
of science are not the right ones to learn about Him.”
Thus began Collins’ search
for God, a search that for most of us, lasts a lifetime. Today, Collins
observes, the search for God has been crowded out “by our busy and
overstimulated lives” And he sees a tendency by many people to throw up their
hands about the question of God and decide not to decide.
“Disillusioned by the
stridency of both perspectives,” he writes, “many choose to reject both the
trustworthiness of scientific conclusions and the value of organized religion,
slipping instead into various forms of antiscientific thinking, shallow
spirituality, or simple apathy.”
Comments
Post a Comment