I’ve just finished listening to a series of lectures on Science and Religion (when you teach a lot of senior classes you find yourself with a little extra time at the end of the year), by Professor Lawrence M. Principe of Johns Hopkins University. The lectures can be found here.
I think it’s not a coincidence that he titled the series Science and Religion as opposed to Science vs Religion, since his main point is that the two, not only can co-exist, but that they did co-exist throughout history, and the idea that they must by necessity conflict is a very modern one. Although I suppose to be more accurate he should have titled it Science and Christianity (He does mention that the same types of discussions were taking place within Judaism and Islam, but since Christianity was the dominate religion in the regions developing the most scientific discoveries, he limits himself for the sake of time). Each of the twelve lectures is only thirty minutes long, so it is a brief survey of science and religion throughout history, but Professor Principe is able to make his point by taking some of the most well-known science/religion battles (Copernicus, Galileo, Darwin, etc.), and putting them in a historical context that greatly softens the perceived conflict by showing, oftentimes with primary sources (He quotes from the minutes of Galileo’s time with the Inquisition), that there were many within the Church that saw no problems with the science whether it was heliocentrism or evolution.
Some highlights from the lectures:
-The Inquisition originally found no problem with Galileo’s writings and were ready to let him go, but the Pope demanded a full trial, probably due more to a falling out that Galileo had with Pope Urban VIII than any real opposition to his science.
-In Darwin’s time, many clergy, but not all, looked at evolution as a beautiful, divine mechanism, and it wasn’t until the early 1900’s and the rise of Fundamentalism that anti-evolution sentiment became really widespread. For some reason, it never occurred to me that the idea of Theistic Evolution was as old as On the Origin of Species, or maybe it never occurred to me that it was accepted by anyone even remotely mainstream.
-A great many of the natural philosophers/scientists throughout history were actually some of the great theologians and even clergy. This is something I feel should have been more obvious to me, or at least stood out as being more significant. Newton talked about God in his physics text, Galileo appealed to God, Robert Boyle was a theologian, Joseph Priestly, Copernicus, Kepler, the list goes on and on.
The lectures do confirm something that I’ve long believed, and which I’ve tried to convey to skeptics.
Science and theology have a lot in common.
Both are man striving for knowledge. Both are a search for ultimate Truth. Both operate through the cooperation of faith and reason.
That last one might deserve it’s own entry one day.
This idea that science and religion have to be at odds is a myth. We’ve just built this chasm over time between willfully ignorant Christians and scientists who’ve lost their faith through having to defend their science, and it ends up presenting the average person with a false choice. It also ends up damaging science and religion. In reality, they are more like siblings. And, just as in real families, it’s heart-breaking that now they seem to be estranged. At least among the general public. I’ll leave you with a quote from the last lecture in the series:
Conflict can be an opportunity for discussion, exploration, and discovery, or an opportunity for becoming shrill and self-righteous, and sulking off to our respective corners. That’s a free choice, but it’s also clear which is the intelligent and productive choice.
Your comments are spot on, Jeff. Glad you enjoyed the lectures, as I did. These lectures deprived me of several misconceptions I’ve carried around with me for several decades and I’m grateful for now understanding the fascinating truth on many issues.
Clark
He also did a really great job of presenting historical figures like Galileo and Pope Urban VIII as individuals with more than one thing motivating them. I think that’s easy to forget a lot of times. Thanks for indirectly loaning them to me through Smokey. I’m really tempted to listen to them again and take notes this time, but I know he’s anxious to hear them.
I’m rapidly progressing through John Frame’s course on the history of philosophy and theology from Reformed Theological Seminary as I mow the yard. I’ve enjoyed that series a lot both because it has exposed me to a number of thinkers who I have heard of but never read and because it has given me a good insight into hardshell Calvinistic theology. However, he gave his lecture on Bonhoeffer while I mowed the field yesterday, and it was simply terrible. It made me nervous to see how outdated and inaccurate his treatment of a theologian who I actually do know something about was. What if that’s the case for others that I don’t know anything about?!?!?
Anyway, all that to say that I am indeed anxious to listen to the science and faith series and am almost ready. If you want to start them again and take notes that’s totally fine. Just give me the first disc when you finish with it, and I’ll get started while you finish up.
—–
I was wondering too if listening to that series has altered your opinion on audiobooks at all. Lecture series like these are really pretty similar to nonfiction audiobooks. I enjoy novels on audio too of course, but I do think that nonfiction translates over to that format best.
I think I would absorb more if I read it instead of listened to it. I can’t seem to just sit and listen; I have to be doing something while it’s playing. Which is why I feel like I need to take notes if I really want to remember any details.
Yeah I can see that. With reading you get the chance to stop and think about a line or a paragraph before moving on if you need to, but the lecturer just keeps going. I also am a big high-lighter of my books, and you can’t do that with lectures. I do love the fast overview that audio-format provides though. It’s really helpful for getting the big picture in a hurry.
The other nice thing about audio lectures is that they are helping me keep my yard in good shape this year. I hate mowing and weedeating, but if I’ve got something good to listen to on my MP3 player it makes the whole thing completely tolerable.