Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Religion

Showing Original Post only (View all)
 

SecularMotion

(7,981 posts)
Wed Mar 19, 2014, 03:43 PM Mar 2014

Another Vapid Effort to Claim that Science and Religion Can Get Along [View all]

Sociologist Elaine Ecklund from Rice University is known for her constant stream of publications and talks promoting the compatibility of science and religion. Her work is, of course, funded by the John Templeton Foundation, whose goal to show that science and faith are mutually supportive. Ecklund’s spinning of her survey data to emphasize interdisciplinary comity—even when the data doesn’t really show it—is getting quite tiresome. I’ve often written about Ecklund’s spin-doctoring, which always yields conclusions congenial to Templeton’s mission, but the distortions just keep on coming. Templeton dispenses some $70 million a year to get its soothing message out.

Now we have another article on Ecklund’s latest research: “New survey suggests science & religion are compatible, but scientists have their doubts.” This the third piece that the Huffington Post has published on this study since February 16 (the others are here and here), implying that this “compatibility” is of great interest to somebody. Further, Ecklund’s study was done in collaboration with the U.S.’s most important science organization, the American Association for the Advancement of Science—an eternal blot on a group that should stay far away from religion.

In brief, Ecklund’s study canvassed 10,241 Americans: a mixture of scientists, “regular” Americans, and evangelical Christians. And her results, described in the latest HuffPo piece are absolutely predictable given Ecklund’s academic history: Science and religion are friends! People see them as compatible!

But the article starts off with something that doesn’t seem propitious for friendship:

Are science and religion incompatible? That seems like a rational conclusion, especially in the wake of last month’s combative evolution-vs.-creationism debate, which pitted “Science Guy” Bill Nye against evangelist Ken Ham.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117071/elaine-ecklund-says-science-religion-are-compatible-why-theyre-not
34 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Religion tends to be incredibly myopic. Arugula Latte Mar 2014 #1
An interesting analysis and she makes some very valid points about the usefulness of this cbayer Mar 2014 #2
The most important takeaway, cbayer, is what we should do when they conflict. trotsky Mar 2014 #3
I don't think the author of the article would agree that religion can be of value el_bryanto Mar 2014 #6
Religion can of course be of value to an individual. trotsky Mar 2014 #7
I'd agree - but then I've always felt that science and religion/philosophy el_bryanto Mar 2014 #8
100% agree with this Dorian Gray Mar 2014 #31
And Templeton funds these studies because that's their mission. longship Mar 2014 #4
I didn't really get the Templeton connection until recently. cbayer Mar 2014 #5
Well, I agree that they have no common standing. longship Mar 2014 #9
They are not succeeding in Texas. okasha Mar 2014 #11
Well, there's this. longship Mar 2014 #12
The creationists influence a relatively small number of schools and students. okasha Mar 2014 #13
That's good to hear. longship Mar 2014 #15
You're very welcome. okasha Mar 2014 #17
Jerry's metaphysical naturalism tolerates no dissent. rug Mar 2014 #10
No, that's an obvious falsehood. Donald Ian Rankin Mar 2014 #14
That's an obvious misunderstanding. rug Mar 2014 #16
No, you're simply wrong, I'm afraid. Donald Ian Rankin Mar 2014 #18
That's simply because he lacks the power to do so. rug Mar 2014 #19
What evidence do you have for that? Donald Ian Rankin Mar 2014 #24
It has nothing to do with the First Amendment. rug Mar 2014 #25
I understand how the word "vapid" in the title of the article LiberalAndProud Mar 2014 #30
He's not the best at it but he's comfortable with it.. rug Mar 2014 #33
Thank you. LiberalAndProud Mar 2014 #34
Who's Jerry? edhopper Mar 2014 #20
The OP author, Jerry Coyne. rug Mar 2014 #21
This message was self-deleted by its author edhopper Mar 2014 #23
Jerry Coyne wtote the articlr. okasha Mar 2014 #26
Oops edhopper Mar 2014 #28
Seems to me that edhopper Mar 2014 #22
why religion and science have nothing to do with each other cheyanne Mar 2014 #27
Welcome back to the religion group cheyanne. cbayer Mar 2014 #29
I think many people are resistant to change or take a reflexive defensive stance as it happens. pinto Mar 2014 #32
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Another Vapid Effort to C...»Reply #0