This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.


← WEIT review: Kevin Padian sucks me back into into the religion/science quagmire

JonLynnHarvey's Avatar Jump to comment 28 by JonLynnHarvey

Some religious apologists have appealed to postmodernism. But postmodernism tends frequently to be overtly anti-science, and fellows like Collins who actually try to reconcile religion and science are virtually never post-modernists.
When Coyne writes

And I’m not so sure that it is a “philosophical” choice” or a “belief” “to “accept a naturalistic versus supernaturalistic explanation of the world around us.”

followed later by

The postmodernist claim that accepting scientific rather than spiritual truths is simply a matter of taste is a claim of breathtaking inanity.

that's really about pro-religionists who actually oppose science (and there are those who do appealing to post-modernism), not pro-religionists who try to reconcile relgion and science, so Coyne has inappropriately conflated two different perspectives.

The NSE can either pander to the more open-minded religious folk, or it can just ignore them altogether. The NSE would be a bit more honest if it said there are conflicting claims about the philosophical implications of science, which it is not the business of science to resolve, but it isn't really promoting religion either, just a kind of "maybe" compatibility based on speculative thinking.

Wed, 01 Apr 2009 14:33:00 UTC | #342642