posted
May 16, 2011 by News Gatherer
It’s not an either/or. This challenges the idea that scientists, and other groups we typically deem as secular, are devoid of those big ‘Why am I here?’ questions. They too have these basic human questions and a desire to find meaning.”. “There’s spirituality among even the most secular scientists,” said Elaine Howard Ecklund, the lead author of the study, which will be published in the June issue of Sociology of Religion. “Spirituality pervades both the religious and atheist thought.
Ecklunds research, rather than focusing on the most religious scientists or the most anti-religious scientists, has revealed a better picture of the complex personal and professional lives of the people who fall in between. These people might be Christians who closet their faith at work or atheists who seek a spiritual practice. Despite the spiritual atheists that make up about 20 percent of scientists at American universities, most believe that religion isnt welcome in the classroom, laboratory or research facility, with more than half worried that religion could hurt academia and science.
The truth, however, is that nearly 50 percent of academic scientists have a religious identity (although this identity is very different in character than the rest of the religious American population) and a majority of them are interested in spirituality. So why don’t we hear more about them? Why don’t they speak up in faculty meetings? And why isn’t there more meaningful dialogue about religion and science on the campuses of our nation’s elite universities?.
I found that most religious scientists manifest their faith in small ways, mainly by spending more time caring about students’ personal needs. Although positive, such a role is quite limited. These scientists are potentially crucial commentators and mentors to students who are searching for ways to make meaningful connections between religion and science. But because of their unwillingness to talk about their own views on religion and spirituality, scientists with faith could be partly to blame for uninformed conversations about religion and science on university campuses.
The problem is with the ambiguity of the term “spiritual.” Of course many of us scientists are concerned with “big questions” about origins and purpose–and even as to what constitute legitimate and meaningful questions. Epistemology and philosophy of science help to refine scientific methodology, and “big questions” motivate great research.
In short, atheists do not believe in anything spiritual. I wasn’t aware that there is such a thing as a “spiritual atheist” since the term atheist describes a philosophy that refutes the existence of anything that is not part of the physical universe. If these scientists do, then they a spiritualists and not atheist.
This was not testimony. Just because some “x” is not a necessary variable in every equation does not mean that the “x” does not exist. They did not have to speak up, but this bit of information is important to the academic world and to clarify the often contentious discussions concerning conflicts between those who distrust scientists as agents of Satan and those who see science as useful, but separate from matters of faith. They wind up having to use terms like “spiritual” to indicate that they disagree with both extremes and are not going to be baited into a discussion using the biased terms of the extremes. I further helps to smack down those in Academia who falsely equate atheism with an understanding of scientific principles. The conflict is generally between those who try to use the Bible as a science book and those who try to use Science for metaphysical truth, and it is important that some are capable of understanding the difference between and value of both.
The spirit of science without the creator who made the laws of nature can bind us into a lifeless, loveless, hopeless reality, but the living God almighty loves us all and is able and willing free anyone who seeks him. Life can also get more personal and spiritual, as opposed to religious, in a way consistent with God’s intent, by a person becoming born again into the Spirit through messiah Jesus, the son of God.
What does that mean? She interviewed “scientists” at “elite” American universities… right… like Rice? Does it make sense to include sociologists and political science professors as “scientists”? What is the point of saying that they are “spiritual”? Okay, so I wonder about how we got here and I am amazed at the complexity of the universe. This is silly. He died for our sins… really?. To say that nearly 50 percent of scientists have a religious identity is absurd. And I like to do yoga. That does not mean I believe in any imaginary desert gods, not to mention the whole silly Jesus story. Of course, almost all scientists are non-religious. This is what the huffpo article says.
“God wants the truth to be known” says who? You? Does (S)He speak directly to you? Or some ancient scripture writen by men who say it’s God’s word?Spirituality is not Religion. Spirituality is a sense of there being more than what is physical/mental/emotional; once you start putting beliefs/tenets/rules to it then it becomes Religion (IMHO).One can live a wonderful and wonder-filled life without spirituality or religion; the Universe is awesome!.
httpv://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6izCYIIXBs&feature=youtube_gdata
Related Stories
Uncategorized 
