The table of statistics on public acceptance for selected countries clearly suggests, as The Economist also notes, that there is a connection between religious conviction and belief in evolution. As belief in gods and religions goes down, belief in evolution tends to rise.
Why is this? Do you think this is a cause for concern?
What questions might this bring up about science? About religion? About theism?
The author of The Economist's article also mentions the ideas of the researchers Gregory Paul and Phil Zuckerman, who argue that belief in god and religion are inversely related to the level of material prosperity in a nation, as they argue, along with their main contention, in "Why the gods are not winning" (2007).
Do you think this is true of your culture? Do you think it is a good or bad thing? Why? Why not?
What, if anything, should be done about the apparent decline in the importance that people attach to religion and gods?
How does this relate to our reading of Plato's Euthyphro?
References
Paul, G. & Zuckerman, P. (2007, May 1). Why the gods are not winning. Edge, 209. Retrieved February 11, 2009 from http://www.edge.org/documents/archive/edge209.html#gp
Plato. (1999). Euthyphro. In D. Gallop (trans.), Defence of Socrates, Euthyphro, Crito (p. 1-23). Oxford Oxfordshire: Oxford University Press.
Unfinished business (2009, February 5). The Economist. Retrieved February 11, 2009 from https://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13059028
My country, Australia, is one of the nations where religion is losing popularity. I'm not sure that people's knowledge of science is increasing, but it's certainly being promoted in schools.
ReplyDeleteThe number of people who go to church regularly is declining and even in families that still call themselves Christian, such as my own Catholic family, actual observation of the rituals and habits of the religion is decreasing. When I was a child, my family always went to mass on Sundays and on special holy days. We never missed for any reason. Now, only my mother regularly attends mass. Also, my own families attitude towards the pope and his teachings is far less respectful than in the past. Before, my parents, like millions of other Australians, would say the abortion was wrong simply because that was what the pope said, now, my own nieces have had abortions with their parents' consent. Even my mother now says that women should be free to have an abortion if they want one.
Is this decline in religious observation a bad thing? I don't think so. There is no evidence that crime or any other social problem is increasing as a result. In fact, because people no longer take Christianity so seriously, many social improvements have become easier for governments to implement, such as legalised abortion. Another social benefit has been the recognition of gay and lesbian partnerships, something that the catholic church hates and argues against, but which Australians are now more willing to accept. This seem to me to be moral improvements that have resulted from the lower respect for the traditional religions of Australians of European descent.
Of course, some people blame the loss of these traditions for increased youth problems and so on, but I'm not sure that there is even any solid evidence that there are increasing problems. Are the young people of today really any worse than the young people of fifty years ago? Are they worse than the children of Athens 2,400 years ago, for whose corrupted morals the democrats of Athens used the law courts to murder Socrates?
When I read this article, I just know and wonder that Darwin’s theory is a arguably the famous scientist such as Newton and Einstein. Because personally, I think all well-known scientist have the same idea and the similar theory. In addition, I also disagree with Gregory Paul and Phil Zuckerman’s research because in my culture we would like to develop our country, but we still believe in god. So I think we can do both of them together. And I don’t think Gregory Paul and Phil Zuckerman’s research is a good because we should preserve our own culture.
ReplyDeleteAlthough there are many religions in the world, which belief that god is exist or not, religion is just belief. It is not a science and it doesn’t have evidences. On the other hand, evolution theory is science which has evidences to support the theorist’s idea. Therefore, when people lessen their belief in gods and religions, believing in evolution is more likely going up. In my opinion, people in this present time have more educated than people in the past, so it is possible that people will have more critical thinking which lead to believe in something concrete than something abstract.
ReplyDeleteThis controversial issue reminds me of one of novels written by Dane Brows, Angels and Demons. In this novel, there are two sides of people, god and science,fight to each other. They both, we can say, win and lose: black and white are mixed to gray. Christians are afraid that people will lack of faith if they study science. In other words, people will believe only in things that can be proven. Faith in god and knowledge in science are hard to get along in the sense of proven evidences. On the other hand, why don’t people consider words in Bible or any kinds of lesson in other religious are forms of holy folks which the goal is to teach people to be a good person. It does not matter whether god really exist or not, but the essential thing is that his words make people calm and want to be a good man. Thus, stop comparing scientist to god.
ReplyDeleteKrich,
ReplyDeleteDo you mean you don't think that Darwin's idea is the greatest scientific insight ever made? What do you think is the most important insight ever made by a scientist?
I'm sure a lot of people disagree with me about that. I used the adverb arguably because although I think a strong case can be made that the theory of evolution is more important than every other scientific advance, I'm not sure that the case is so strong that everyone would be convinced. And I do think that very strong cases can be argued for other discoveries.
That's why I'm wondering what you think is a more important discovery and why you think it's more important than the theory of evolution.
I have another question, but it can wait.
P seems to think that a rise in critical thinking will mean less belief in religion. I agree with that, but I wasn't sure if P thought that was a good thing or not.
ReplyDeleteKrich clearly seems to think it is a bad thing.
Tuk seems to think that science and religion can both exist peacefully by offering different sorts of value or uses to people. I think something similar, but maybe I'm a little less optimistic than Tuk. I also liked her comparison to Dan Brown's novel, with it's similar theme.
Everyone's response has given me something new to think about, and respond to.
Please feel welcome to add another comment of your own if you would like to respond to anything else in the original post or anything in one of your classmates' comments.
It is very interesting issue and difficult to give a best answer. As I'm a student whose field is theology, many collogues and even professiors try to give a best answer of the question. Relating to this question, comparing with science and religions, first I asked myself that what holy is and what unholy is. Becuase priests and cristian argue their perspective is holy to keep it. Euthyphro also did for holy things. I gave you short comment today. Next time, I'll leave another comment about it.
ReplyDelete