Science and Religion - some more thoughts

Yesterday one of my friends told me about Beyond Belief, which posted a recent Meeting where some of the world's leading minds got together to discuss current conflicts between science and religion. While listening to their arguments, it became clear to me that religion cannot be discussed without its historical context. Religion grew as the oldest belief system among early humans as they were struggling to survive in harsh conditions without the benefit of modern science. As Einstein wrote, "With primitive man it is above all fear that evokes religious notions - fear of hunger, wild beasts, sickness, death. Since at this stage of existence understanding of causal connections is usually poorly developed, the human mind creates illusory beings more or less analogous to itself on whose wills and actions these fearful happenings depend. Thus one tries to secure the favor of these beings by carrying out actions and offering sacrifices which, according to the tradition handed down from generation to generation, propitiate them or make them well disposed toward a mortal." Seen in this historical context, it is easy to identify today with Laplace's famous words in the late 18^th century, when asked by Napoleon how God fits into his voluminous thesis on celestial mechanics: "Sire, I have not needed that hypothesis". Science has greatly advanced our understanding of how nature works, and we can cope with many natural calamities using scientific knowledge alone without the need to invoke religion. Paraphrasing Steven Weinberg, "Religion is like an old maiden - she was perhaps nice when young, but now ugly". Of course, there is a significant fraction of the over 6 billion people in the world who still believe in a God, and science must own up responsibility to some degree for its failure in reaching out to them.

The question then is what makes today's smart scientists like Francis Collins turn to religion while at the same time pursuing a career in cutting-edge science. Or, why 7% among the fellows of National Academy of Sciences, the crème de la crème of American scientific establishment, still believe in a personal God. These people have over 200 years of advanced scientific knowledge compared to what Laplace ever had, and still find a need for religious faith. This point has not come across well in the Meeting, except in the talk by Neil deGrasse Tyson who merely pointed out the fact without offering a reason. I believe this has much to do with the inability of current science to answer some of the deep philosophical questions about life and Universe, a topic over which I went at some length in my last post.

Move on to Science's Holy Grail - "The Final Theory".