Religion
Related: About this forumMisconceptions of science and religion found in new study
http://news.rice.edu/2014/02/16/misconceptions-of-science-and-religion-found-in-new-study-2/DAVID RUTH FEBRUARY 16, 2014
POSTED IN: NEWS RELEASES
HOUSTON (Feb. 16, 2014) The publics view that science and religion cant work in collaboration is a misconception that stunts progress, according to a new survey of more than 10,000 Americans, scientists and evangelical Protestants. The study by Rice University also found that scientists and the general public are surprisingly similar in their religious practices.
Photo courtesy: Jeff Fitlow/Rice University
The study, Religious Understandings of Science (RUS), was conducted by sociologist Elaine Howard Ecklund and presented today in Chicago during the annual American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) conference. Ecklund is the Autrey Professor of Sociology and director of Rices Religion and Public Life Program.
We found that nearly 50 percent of evangelicals believe that science and religion can work together and support one another, Ecklund said. Thats in contrast to the fact that only 38 percent of Americans feel that science and religion can work in collaboration.
The study also found that 18 percent of scientists attended weekly religious services, compared with 20 percent of the general U.S. population; 15 percent consider themselves very religious (versus 19 percent of the general U.S. population); 13.5 percent read religious texts weekly (compared with 17 percent of the U.S. population); and 19 percent pray several times a day (versus 26 percent of the U.S. population).
- See more at: http://news.rice.edu/2014/02/16/misconceptions-of-science-and-religion-found-in-new-study-2/#sthash.2gwqE09T.dpuf
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)i`m a moderate evangelical...http://quizfarm.com/quizzes/new/aggienewc/what-kind-of-evangelical-are-you/
after suffering a cardiac arrest a year ago i still wrestle with the fact that for a brief moment i was dead. around 2% of the people who went through what i did live. of those who survive many never fully recover at the level that i have.
without science i would be dead.i was in a induced coma for 4 days and recovery took another week.rehab took another three weeks. without faith in modern medicine ,the doctors , nurses, and my loved ones would have lost hope. i`m sure most of those who cared for me were of many different faiths and they relied on science to do their job do comfort me and save my life. i find these posts between science and religion very amusing and sometimes very frustrating.
of course there is no proof there is a god,well at least i didn't see him. i can attest there`s no light.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)I came out as a "well informed Baptist". I'm not sure what that means for a non-believer.
Sounds like you had quite an experience. There is another member who posts here who had what he describes a a pretty profound experience under circumstances similar to yours. I tend to think these are purely neurological events, but I'm not certain.
Interesting about "faith" in medicine. I have been having some debates here about non-religious faith, and I think medicine can provide an interesting example.
trotsky
(49,533 posts)Act_of_Reparation
(9,116 posts)My creed comic collection has 66 books. Agree.
I wish I could take communion a nap every day. Agree.
I believe in Covenant Theology a crazy little thing called love, but some people take it too far. Agree.
My church's worship cat follows some form of the Regulative Principle of Worship me around like I'm wearing tuna tins for shoes. Agree.
Well gee wiz, I'm an Evangelical! Whoda thunk it.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)LostOne4Ever
(9,290 posts)That link multiple positions into a single question.
Which part am I agreeing with? Believing in Covenant Theology? That people take it too far? Both? Either?
Or how about:
Am I agreeing that Roman Catholics are Christian or that they just barely fit that definition?
@.@
Which option to pick?
Brettongarcia
(2,262 posts)For decades, I've been troubled by the discrepancy between the numbers who report regular church attendance, even weekly ... vs. the tiny number of cars on the roads, early Sunday morning.
Following this, I started to look into it. And informally calculated actual weekly attendance at about 4%, for all.
My conclusion? Christians are REPORTING high attendance. But they are lying, to look good.
Jesus told us that most religious folks are "hypocrites."
The polls, like PEW, need to check not just what informants SAY; but then next check it against actual observed attendance in churches.
In an argument with a PEW representative, PEW would not say that it did in fact check what it heard, against observed verification.
cbayer
(146,218 posts)In the rural south, the churches appear to be packed on Sunday morning and the restaurants and shops generally closed until after services.
But there is good evidence that US christians do over report church attendance. I think 4% is too low and the stats I have seen are somewhere between 20 - 40 %, IIRC.
Another study showed that in some European countries, people grossly underreport attendance. There are definitely strong cultural influences at play, but to conclude that "most religious folks are hypocrites" really has no basis in fact (and I'm not sure where you saw that Jesus said that).
trotsky
(49,533 posts)Just 23% attend more than once a month. Other studies have indicated only 17% of Americans attend a religious service on any given weekend, which tends to confirm the overall picture.
MellowDem
(5,018 posts)that religion and science not working together is a "misconception". Seems strange. Especially when, based on the definition of words, religion and science in fact don't work together.
People who keep trying to pretend that science and religion can somehow work together seem to mostly be moderately religious people still trying to grasp onto their nonsensical beliefs. The compartmentalization is becoming harder and harder in a society that now has more people openly challenging the presumptions of religion every day.
The reason scientists may be embarrassed to share they're religious is because they know it's a disconnect, they know they're engaged in dissonance, a bit of intellectual dishonesty. They don't want to confront it, hence the compartmentalization. This "study" and the idea of no-overlapping-magistria whatever crap is simply to comfort and appease people who want to compartmentalize, but it is all an excuse and a slap in the face to open and honest critical thinking.
What stunts progress is accommodating terrible ideas because you don't want to hurts someone's feelings. It's a condescending, arrogant practice that views believers as sensitive children that can't be bothered with the truth, much less criticism, or they'll not be able to handle it.
Promoting the idea that lying to yourself and ignoring dissonance is good and promotes progress is a terrible thing.
trotsky
(49,533 posts)muriel_volestrangler
(101,400 posts)It seems profoundly unethical of Rice University to put a subjective claim like that in their press release as if that's something they've shown. Still, she got a million dollars from the Templeton Foundation for this, so I guess she has to say something they'll see as positive to keep the money flowing.
Gothmog
(145,752 posts)I did my best on this quiz
You Scored as Moderate Evangelical
You probably have Evangelical heritage, but you have become uncomfortable with the trappings of traditional American Christianity. You long for a more authentic experience of worship and to be with more authentic people. Blue Like Jazz is on your top five Christian Books list.
Gothmog
(145,752 posts)I firmly believe that science and religion are not in conflict. I am not surprised that there was no breakdown for Jews