Over an end of semester dinner with classmates last night I encountered what I had always thought impossible: a frank and honest discussion about religion that didn’t end in me wanting to slap someone in frustration. In fact, I would go so far as to say that I found it profoundly insightful.
I’m an avid Pharyngula reader and a big Dawkins fan, but usually steer clear of the Science vs Religion debates that are awash throughout the blogosphere. Not because I don’t have an opinion, but because it’s a huge topic area and for the most part I just can’t be bothered. Also, it always seems to be the same stuff going around and around ad nauseum.
And it’s for these same reasons that religion doesn’t usually form part of my dinner time conversation repertoire. It’s more the domain of drunken ranting, particularly with one of said classmates who I have enjoyed numerous alcohol induced religious arguments with.
My classmates are all very smart, knowledgeable and critical young scientists, but I did not really understand how this could be reconciled with their religious beliefs (they’re all Catholic) until our conversation last night. It turns out that their beliefs are much more rational than I had preconceived.
At the root of it, their concept of God is pretty much the same as my concept of the scientifically unknown. They believe in evolution, the big bang, and explaining natural phenomena through science. They do not believe God dictates their actions or controls their destinies, and they do not pray for divine intervention in the minutia of their daily lives.
The only real difference between myself and them is that I don’t mind the idea that the universe is the be all and end all (in fact, I live in a constant state of awe at this concept), while they find a wee bit of comfort in thinking that beyond all this there is some divine force that they just so happen to call God.
I can sympathise with this concept of religion, and don’t find it that irrational. I don’t really see a huge disparity between believing that beyond the ends of the universe there exists either nothing or some omnipotent force. The concept of god does not explain the universe, it just exists as a sort of mental safety net for when we get beyond the bounds of our imagination. I don’t believe it, but I can understand why so many people do.
Importantly, this discussion also helped me to realise that it’s probably not the best idea to lay my preconceptions about religion on anybody who calls themselves a christian. While I do have a fairly sound understanding of christianity (I went to a Catholic school AND i’ve read The Da Vinci Code) I have been reading Dawkins and PZ Myers for way too long without stopping to think that not all religious types are irrational and close minded.
That said, the rational academic christian is definitely in a different league to the crazed religious zealots that mascarade their doctrines as pseudo scientific theory.
(new edit: A similar conclusion is drawn after a hefty yet eloquent discussion on the philosophy of science by Dr Freeride)
0 Responses to “Refreshingly frank religious discussion”