In 1989, astronomer Carl Sagan — one of the best public communicators of science of our time — said that “Ignorance of science threatens our economic well-being, national security and the democratic process. We must do better.”
Twenty years later, how are scientists confronting this national ignorance that Sagan warned us about — especially when it comes to engaging a largely religious general public? Not so well.
During the past four years, I have worked on the most comprehensive study to date of what natural and social scientists think about religion. I surveyed nearly 1,700 scientists from the top universities in the nation and conducted in-depth interviews with 275 of them. My studies show that most scientists are not like Richard Dawkins, author of “The God Delusion,” who is well known for being anti-religion. Nearly 50 percent of scientists are part of a religious community. Although my study shows nearly 40 percent in some science disciplines are atheists, I can count on one hand the number of atheist scientists I spoke with who share Dawkins’ vehement anti-religious sentiment.
Unfortunately, many Americans think that scientists are more like Richard Dawkins than Francis Collins, an evangelical Christian who is the author of “Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief“ and head of the National Institutes of Health. (Collins spoke at the Baker Institute in 2009. View this webcast to hear his talk.) According to a 2006 National Science Foundation survey, nearly 25 percent of Americans still think scientists are downright hostile to religion and 50 percent of Americans think we depend too much on science and not enough on faith.
Why do Americans still think scientists are hostile to religion? I found that scientists with faith often practice a “secret science” within their faith communities, where they are hesitant to discuss scientific ideas because they are afraid of offending those sitting in the pews next to them. This reticence results in a lack of role models for youth who might want to go into science but are fearful that science might lead them away from faith.
Instead of just a friendly co-existence between religion and science, we need a “radical dialogue” — in which each side tries to understand why the other thinks the way that it does, and where genuine common ground is sought. This dialogue should reach the rank-and-file in religious communities with the message of how to maintain faith while fully pursuing science. And we need a radical dialogue that reaches the rank-and-file in the scientific community to provide better tools to reach out to religious people.
Next week, on Wednesday, April 7, the Baker Institute will host a discussion about religion and science using my study, recently published in the book “Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really Think,” as a starting point. The goal of the event is to promote dialogue between the scientific community and religious leaders.
What better place to start than right here in Houston, where some of the largest congregations in the country are located, and in Texas, where school boards are debating what to teach about evolution.
The discussion is a joint project between the Baker Institute Science and Technology Policy Program and the Rice University Institute for Urban Research’s program on Religion and Public Life and will include a book signing. A limited number of seats are open to the public. To attend, please visit the Baker Institute Web site for RSVP and program information. There will also be a live webcast of the event.
Elaine Howard Ecklund is an assistant professor of sociology at Rice University and director of the Program on Religion and Public Life at Rice’s Institute for Urban Research. She is also a Baker Institute Rice scholar. Ecklund is the author of the new book from Oxford University Press, “Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really Think.”