ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology Centers
Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related institutions.
*****************************************************************************

You're right Ian. The personal worldview I shared is just that and has no
place in the issue of the public's perception of science with regard to
belief, faith, god(s), and so on. Though I consider myself an atheist, I
don't consider science such and I'd like to think I don't let my own belief
get in the way of good science education. I do think there's some merit to
applying aspects of science in other areas of life - for decision-making and
weighing the pros and cons of arguments incapable of being settled through
science but I have yet to figure out how best to articulate this and
continue to uphold my principles. It's an ongoing process.

With regard to Oxford's definitions - people often don't differentiate
between "the belief that god does not exist" and the statement "god does not
exist." An atheist, therefore, by either my definition or Oxford's isn't
making an absolute claim as was once proposed here. In Oxford's case, the
definition states it is a person's *belief* and not their *knowledge*.
Because of the probability factors I mentioned, that's why I stated it was a
reasonable belief to hold. If atheism were taken literally as "without"
theism, then it would be applicable to science but because it is doubtful
that the word is interpreted this way by the majority of the public, it
would be harmful to use the word when describing science.

Agnostics are often described as "fence sitters" - they don't or can't know
either way. To me this doesn't apply to science. Science, by definition, is
oblivious to the supernatural. For science, the supernatural does not
exist - or if this is to harsh, science is unaware of supernatural
phenomena, including god(s). Agnosticism doesn't capture this reality - it
states "I've explored the arguments for and against and both are equally
strong/weak." It's a middle ground until more information or evidence
arrives.

As an aside, though most editions of Darwin's _Origin_ references a
"creator" in the final paragraph, this was absent from the first edition. It
was because of public pressure that he began including the word in future
editions. Ernst Mayr created a facsimile of the original that is reasonably
priced at bookstores.

Finally, I agree that it would be wonderful to minimize the damage done by
extremists on all sides but sadly, I'm not optimistic. It seems that
whenever a solution depends on changing other people to each a goal, it is
near impossible to implement.

Best,
Amanda





----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian Russell" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 3:11 PM
Subject: Re: Evolution, Creation, can we please move on?


ISEN-ASTC-L is a service of the Association of Science-Technology Centers
Incorporated, a worldwide network of science museums and related
institutions.
****************************************************************************
*

At 17:25 10/01/2007, Amanda wrote:
>This forces me to conclude, considering the probability curve,
>that it is very unlikely that god claims have any merit. Atheism (which
>literally means 'without theism' and *not* "claims god doesn't exist") is
>therefore a reasonable position to hold.

After so much useful progress has been made in
our discussion, I simply can't let this pass,
Amanda. Previously you preferred to avoid
describing the position of science in terms of atheism or agnosticism.

At 21:26 03/01/2007, Amanda wrote:
>I prefer the descriptive word "oblivious".

...and I agreed this is a fair description of
science in relation to religion, though it is
much closer to the Oxford Dictionary definition
of agnosticism than it is to atheism.

Compact Oxford English Dictionary
http://www.askoxford.com/dictionaries/compact_oed/?view=uk

atheism

. noun: the belief that God does not exist.

- DERIVATIVES atheist noun; atheistic adjective; atheistical adjective.

- ORIGIN from Greek a- 'without' + theos 'god'.

agnostic

. noun: a person who believes that nothing can be
known concerning the existence of God.

. adjective: relating to agnostics.

- DERIVATIVES agnosticism noun.

You argue, Amanda, that atheism is a reasonable
position for a person to hold, if they are
unwilling to trust anything other than that which
can be observed and measured. Again, I agree, even though I am not an
atheist.

But the personal beliefs of individual scientists
and science communicators are not the issue here.
The issue is the public's perception of the
position of SCIENCE with respect to beliefs which
a high percentage of our target audience hold
very dearly indeed. The central territory of
these beliefs does not conflict with science,
only certain peripheral add-ons such as
'intelligent design' and 'young-earth
creationism'. According to the final page of
Darwin's Origin of Species, even belief in a
creator need not conflict with science (which is
why I always carefully refer to 'militant creationism').

Much as I would like to argue the case for a
concept of a Creator and Sustainer far more
beautiful, comprehensive and intellectually
satisfying than the travesty currently promoted
by some and trashed by others, I am not doing
that here. I am just trying to show that this
huge science communication problem is not going
to be solved if we allow our purely personal
views on religion to damage public confidence in the impartiality of
science.

T H Huxley, Darwin's original (and best?)
bulldog, originally coined the term 'agnostic'
precisely for this purpose, merciless as he was
with those who argued against Darwinism in the name of religion.

To win this fight, we first need to persuade
insensitive 'crusading atheists' on the Darwinism
Side to identify their targets more accurately
and stop this unacceptable collateral damage.
Then we can work to convince the public what we
have agreed in this discussion, that the core
beliefs of the Creation Side need not conflict
with science. The majority of the tacit support
for the ID Campaign would quickly evaporate.

There is growing Christian opposition to militant
creationism, for example see:
http://www.speroforum.com/site/article.asp?id=5750&t=UK+Christians%2C+humani
sts+against+creationism

Darwin also has his church mice. We are breeding
fast and effectively nibbling away inside
structures that resist all other attacks. Don't let anyone squash us.


[log in to unmask] * http://www.interactives.co.uk
*
Give people facts and you feed their minds for an hour.
Awaken curiosity and they feed their own minds for a lifetime.
*
Ian Russell

***********************************************************************
More information about the Informal Science Education Network and the
Association of Science-Technology Centers may be found at
http://www.astc.org.
To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the
message  SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to
[log in to unmask]

***********************************************************************
More information about the Informal Science Education Network and the
Association of Science-Technology Centers may be found at http://www.astc.org.
To remove your e-mail address from the ISEN-ASTC-L list, send the
message  SIGNOFF ISEN-ASTC-L in the BODY of a message to
[log in to unmask]