Science vs. Religion: How many scientists actually believe?
-thumb-300x251-42749-thumb-200x167-42752.jpg)
Francis Collins | by flickr user Chuck Holton
Do scientists at our nation’s top universities fit the stereotype of anti-religion atheists? A few are hard core atheists, reports Elaine Howard Ecklund in “Science vs. Religion,” but not many. About half identify with an established religious affiliation, as we discussed yesterday.
But let’s explore that finding today. Claiming an affiliation is one thing. Believing in religion is quite another. What do scientists actually believe when it comes to religion? Almost three-quarters say “there are basic truths in many religions.” This compares with just over 80% of Americans who believe the same. About a quarter of elite scientists agree that “there is very little truth in any religion.” Only 4% of the general population feels the same.
Do any scientists believe that one religion has a monopoly on truth? Not many—only 3%. But only 12% of the American people believe so anyway.
A glaring difference between elite scientists and other Americans comes when asked about belief in God, Ecklund finds. Almost all Americans believe in God. But only a third of elite scientists believe in some sort of God.
How about religious practice? Just over half of elite scientists say they never attend religious services, compared with 22% of the general public. Roughly equal proportions (about 30%) attend less than once a month. Almost half of all Americans attend religious services once a month or more, compared with 18% of scientists.
The picture that’s emerging from Ecklund’s research shows that the reality is more complex than the simple dichotomy of science versus religion. Yes, scientists are less religious than the general population. But there are also many religious scientists, even a few outspoken evangelicals—like Francis Collins, who headed the prestigious Human Genome Project (1993-2008), and was appointed last year by Obama to head the National Institutes of Health. Collins says he feels no conflict between science and religion. (Read about Francis Collins’ latest project in ReadTheSpirit today.)
Would science be better off or worse off if more scientists were like Francis Collins? Would religion be better off or worse off?
Dr. Wayne E. Baker is a sociologist on the senior faculty of the University of Michigan Ross School of Business. He specializes in researching the core beliefs and desires that motivate and shape American culture. Occasionally, Dr. Baker will share a series of faith-related discussions from his blog, Our Values. He can be reached at ourvaluesproject@gmail.com.
Comments
george cunningham
Tue, Jun 22, 2010 : 5:16 p.m.
I have a few problems with Ecklunds book. She says almost a third of elite scientists believe in "some sort of God". In her raw data less than 10% believe in a personal god who hears and answers prayers, has reveled a moral code and will judge us in an afterlife. This is the only god that matters to the bulk of monothiestic religions. An impersonal cosmic force, or an uncaused deist, or other versions of god appeals only to an elite group of theologists, philosophers and new age cultists. Francis Collins believes in a personal god and the historical reliability of the bible, positions that I have critiqued in my book "Decoding the Language of God- Can aScientist Really Be a Believer"
W. Vida
Tue, Jun 8, 2010 : 11:12 p.m.
I think that it would be good to have more theists in the science world. I recently read a biography on Isaac Newton and the author made the case that his devout theism contributed to his discoveries. Here is a review I wrote of that book: http://religionannarbor.wordpress.com/2010/06/02/book-review-isaac-newton-by-mitch-stokes/
DrWhatever
Tue, Jun 8, 2010 : 3:16 p.m.
coming from a perspective of an atheist in America surrounded by conservative Christian Culture ( I know no other anti-theists or atheists in my world) Religion badly needs religious scientists if religion is to remain a healthy social institution. Current ( American) religious culture demonizes science and as a result strengthens a false dichotomy that just isnt accurate and contributes to the lack of science education in popular culture. Every religous person I know demonizes science and the Natural World and places no value in it. Very sad since the Natural World is such a powerful source for emotional religous feelings. I am looked upon as wierd or odd for even enjoying science in a recreational and even spiritual context. Creationists and its anti-science absolutist positions has caused a massive braindrain inside the ( American) Evangelical institutions. They cause much more damage than any anti-theist in driving intelligent people away from christianity. I attended conservative Christian churches most my life, never met a single scientist, academic, doctor in 20 years. On the other side of the coin, I feel utter resentment towards atheists using evolution as a platform for anti-theism ( even though I myself am a anti-theist atheist, and consider Dawkins a hero)..it serves no purpose but to contribute to the demonization of Science. Both sides would serve humanity better if this false dichotomy did not exist and instead found common appreciation and value for Science and its methods.