ROCKVILLE, Maryland (CNN) — I am a scientist and a believer, and I find no conflict between those world views.As the director of the Human Genome Project, I have led a consortium of scientists to read out the 3.1 billion letters of the human genome, our own DNA instruction book. As a believer, I see DNA, the information molecule of all living things, as God’s language, and the elegance and complexity of our own bodies and the rest of nature as a reflection of God’s plan. I did not always embrace these perspectives. As a graduate student in physical chemistry in the 1970s, I was an atheist, finding no reason to postulate the existence of any truths outside of mathematics, physics and chemistry. But then I went to medical school, and encountered life and death issues at the bedsides of my patients. Challenged by one of those patients, who asked “What do you believe, doctor?”, I began searching for answers. I had to admit that the science I loved so much was powerless to answer questions such as “What is the meaning of life?” “Why am I here?” “Why does mathematics work, anyway?” “If the universe had a beginning, who created it?” “Why are the physical constants in the universe so finely tuned to allow the possibility of complex life forms?” “Why do humans have a moral sense?” “What happens after we die?” (Watch Francis Collins discuss how he came to believe in God )I had always assumed that faith was based on purely emotional and irrational arguments, and was astounded to discover, initially in the writings of the Oxford scholar C.S. Lewis and subsequently from many other sources, that one could build a very strong case for the plausibility of the existence of God on purely rational grounds. My earlier atheist’s assertion that “I know there is no God” emerged as the least defensible. As the British writer G.K. Chesterton famously remarked, “Atheism is the most daring of all dogmas, for it is the assertion of a universal negative.”But reason alone cannot prove the existence of God. Faith is reason plus revelation, and the revelation part requires one to think with the spirit as well as with the mind. You have to hear the music, not just read the notes on the page. Ultimately, a leap of faith is required.
And that’s when my head exploded, your honor.It amazes me when smart people believe stupid things. Atheism is “daring”, because it “asserts a universal negative”, but there is nothing daring about saying Santa Claus or Zeus definitely doesn’t exist. He admits reason “alone” can’t prove god exists — although I’d say that reason has to be discounted entirely in order to believe something exists that breaks all laws of physics. Too bad some scientists are so desperate to avoid thinking about their own mortality that they suspend their own intellect.You can be smart without being reality-inclined — and here’s a prime example.
Elipsis indicate a trailing off effect and are used to emulate spoken speach more so than writen speach. Why do people get bent out of shape about them? They’re perfectly legitimate. Geez….
Anyway, Phreedom, are you suggesting and argument from authority? Would it carry any weight from us to you if we suggested the vast numbers of even smarter scientists who’s lack of belief in a god is re-enforced by their own experiences and knowledge of science? (Say, Einstein for instance.)
Thought not. So why the dishonest argument?
I wasn’t getting “bent out of shape” about the ellipses. I was just curious if they taught people about the existence of commas at troll school. Perhaps they are comma agnostic.
Justin…it…makes…the…poster…seem…as if…they…are…thoughtful…when…in fact…they…have…very…little…of substance…to say…:-)
It’s like I’m stuck in that movie Groundhog Day where the same stupid shit happens over…&…over…&…over…
Phreedm,
How is positing a deity somehow a “new discovery”? Is it a new discovery of a new imaginary friend? I think people have had that one for awhile.
Theism is not scientific.
Thus, you want to know why we look down upon such people like Collins? It’s because he’s not using science to discover the truth. Yet, you refer to it as a “new discovery”. How can you be so ignorant? How can you be so elusive? How can you attempt to obfuscate?
You play on words, always.. why? Because your god is bullshit and you have nothing to show for it.
These kinds of people who say there is no conflict between religion and science amaze and anger me because they ignore the long history of hostility against any kind of questioning, including science, on the part of religion.
The way people come to the ahistorical conclusion that there is no conflict between science and religion is to redefine both in their own minds so theres is no conflict. They just arbitrarily divide things up so there is no conflict. Take some of the questions from this article: “why does mathematics work?”, and “what is the meaning of life?” There is no reason why these questions can’t be investigated scientifically. To say they can’t is to draw an arbitrary distinction for no reason.
This is just another circular argument. The conclusion, “there is no conflict between religion and science” is based on assuming that there is no conflict between religion and science. It’s like saying there was never any conflict between communism and capitalism by making some arbitrary distinction between the two that ignores the whole cold war era.
Here is the trailer for Bill Mahers upcoming movie “Religulous”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSa2j6UoU78&eurl=http://richarddawkins.net/article,2693,Trailer-for-Religulous,Bill-Maher
alex,
That movie looks awesome.
I didn’t even notice the pun in the title the first few times I looked at it. I thought it just said Religious rather that the much more apt Religulous.
Faith like this seems to be just a defense mechanism against the terrifying possibility that there probably isn’t anything after death. As a scientist and a doctor, he probably is well aware of this, but he fears as much (if not more, as a result of his contact with death) the uncertainty that plagues every human being daily. He is smart enough to be able to form a rational argument for the belief in God, but not quite strong enough to listen to the part of him that knows that in his rational mind, there is no rational justification for blind faith.
I’m sure most people reading this site have read this book- if not, they should. Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion has often been deemed, ironically, as the Atheist’s “Bible.” It is a remarkable, entertaining, and incredible, comprehensive argument for atheism. You can access it online at BooksOnBoard.com along with several other Dawkins books, all brilliant.
Ultimately, we must question everything, and I tend to believe that faith in religion requires a complete devotion devoid of a search for actual truth, which is extremely limiting. Fear is the only thing that causes intelligent people to choose faith over rational thought.
Alatham
Yes the what-type question is more fundamental. The question “Why?” makes sense in the context of established theory and makes sense outside established theory if by “Why?” one means “What predicts?”. But when no established theory exists “What predicts?” is more like a plea than a question.
It is interesting that the five questions: “Who?”, “Where?”, “When?”, “Why?” and “How?” can be written as what-type questions. The same can not be said of those five questions.
Hahahahahahahahahaha.
nakins,
I don’t think you know what ‘atheism’ is. I also don’t think you understand the impossibility of proving a negative, nor do you understand that science is not generally concerned with the existence of a deity. Deities are irrelevant.
How many atheists here think “God does not exist” is a sensible thing to say?
I, for one, do not. And yet, I’m an atheist. How could that be?
What,
You asked this of nakins:
Since I don’t have a lot of hope that it will be properly answered by him/her, I’ll take a shot.
How about “what happens if we do this?”
Reason, It will be a while.
Until further notice, “religulous” is my favorite word. (This beat’s Mr. T’s “absoludicris”!)
Nakins,
Scientists do not roam the hills of Scotland looking for fairies because the theory that fairies exist does not make sense. It is an internally illogical theory because fairies would contradict all that we know about biology and physics (that would be the biology that created the polio vaccine and the physics that put a man on the moon). Why waste time on fictional creatures?
With over 1,000 religions in the world, and thousands more throughout known history, our observations tell us that humans must be inventing these gods, creating a clear pattern that has high predictive value. Furthermore, we can observe that all religions have evolved as sociological phenomenon, with clear cultural influences from the past. Finally, we can ask ourselves if the god hypothesis even makes sense. Exactly why would a god create a universe and then hide from us but expect us to believe in it? One would have to string together some pretty wild propositions to make that make sense. Why believe a hypothesis with no supporting evidence and no real voids to fill?
At some point, it is no longer rational to defend such a hypothesis or hold out for the possibility that everything we know might suddenly turn out to be wrong. You might as well spend your life looking for fairies under toadstools.
So Phreem, if you are a believer, then why don?t you go post on religious blogs? This blog is supposed to be for fellow atheists discussing issues. Why are you so arrogant that you think your opinion is so much more valuable than anybody else?s? You seem to delight in putting people down rather than intelligently discussing the issues.
We need more Atheists to respond on this blog site.
An interview in which Maher and Dawkins discuss Francis Collins. It was the talking snake that sealed the deal for Dawkins. The link is to the Scientific American site:
http://tinyurl.com/3fslsl
Collins may well be able to perform his duties but, it leaves me wondering what happens if his responsibilities as a scientist come into conflict with his particular god-idea. Will he deny science or his god-idea?
After reading some of the quotes attributed to him (linked from his wikipedia page), I keep wondering if he has really taken the time to examine the conflicts in his own statements. However, it looks as though he has other ideas for his future(per his wikipedia page):
On May 28, 2008, Collins announced his intention to step down from his post as NHGRI director on August 1, 2008 to explore writing projects and other professional opportunities.
An interview in which Maher and Dawkins discuss Francis Collins. It was the talking snake that sealed the deal for Dawkins. The link is to the Scientific American site:
http://tinyurl.com/3fslsl
Collins may well be able to perform his duties but, it leaves me wondering what happens if his responsibilities as a scientist come into conflict with his particular god-idea. Will he deny science or his god-idea?
After reading some of the quotes attributed to him (linked from his wikipedia page), I keep wondering if he has really taken the time to examine the conflicts in his own statements. However, it looks as though he has other ideas for his future(per his wikipedia page):
On May 28, 2008, Collins announced his intention to step down from his post as NHGRI director on August 1, 2008 to explore writing projects and other professional opportunities.
Dave
What do you think about inviting Collins to debate us on this blog?
RedLilac
Don’t feed the troll.
shorebird-
It’s practically a tradition here that sooner or later every person that posts more than a couple of times will end up addressing that troll.
That or talk about him in the third person. He lies, never responds to the points people make, pretends to have no doubts, rudely distorts and quotemines and can frequently be observed projecting the failings of the religious on those who criticize them. He isn’t a very attractive example of those finer qualities claimed by the religious for themselves.
He definitely is an asset if you measure the value of the blog by the number of comments generated. Not so much, though if it is quality and mutual respect you appreciate.
RedLilac
Most of his routine has nothing to do with atheism or religion. His main complaint is that atheists are liberal and he considers this board an arm of the DNC or the communist party . He would be happier on a ACLU blog. Thats what the republicans get for their massive atheist outreach program.
Comment from: phreedm
Dave…so when are you going to “recover”?
How is it that as an adult you still hold on to your childhood beliefs?
At least Dr. Collins has lived his adult life with an open mind to all possibilities…have you?
As I’ve always said…the only way to be an atheist is to have a closed mind…
Why do atheists find it impossible to ever take a leap of faith?
Are you going to claim that there is no such thing as faith?
I didn’t think anyone could back up their claims…just merely parroting everything they’ve ever heard…
This thread is going to be one for the record books…
phreakshow…so when are you going to “recover”?
How is it that as an adult you still hold on to your childhood beliefs?
At least the atheists have lived their adult life with an open mind to all possibilities…have you?
As I’ve always said…the only way to be a person of faith is to have a closed mind…
Why do the religiously fervent find it impossible to ever rationally examine their religious beliefs?
Are you going to claim that there is no such thing as evolution?
I didn’t think anyone could back up their claims…just merely parroting everything they’ve ever heard…
This thread is going to be one for the record books…
In a different time and place there is no telling what Mr. Collins would have become. He is obviously a very intelligent guy but so was Josef Mengele, the Angel of Death at Auschwitz. At no point am I implying Mr. Collins is not a good man. Up front this will sound like a twisted parallel but I’ll weave it together.
Josef Mengele was raised a Catholic, schooled in medicine then philosophy. He later studied anthropology and paleontology as his interest in medicine fell by the wayside. The volatile politics in Nazi Germany led him into eugenics, the study of the secrets of genetics that lead to human deformities. Like many prominent German academics and medical professionals he was persuing the theory of unworthy life.
The intent was to eliminate inferior gene strands in an attempt to create a Germanic super race. His specialty was experimenting with twins at Auschwitz. He placed twins in special quarters where they recieved more food and better living conditions and were not subjected to beatings. He loved those twins to death. They were his specimens that advanced his career.
The after the fact look at his psychology led to the conclusion, with his religious upbringing, ethics of medicine and search for truth via philosophy, that he was an example of “doubling”, a dual personality.
As he stood seperating Jews on the platform at Auschwitz he dressed in his finely pressed uniform with white cotton dress gloves and often whistled Wagner tunes. He had a pleasant demeaner as he acted out his role of sophisticated monster. He was playing god.
Now, was he really much different from all the Christians who wander thru their petty lives today daydreaming about their trip to heaven as corporate America spreads depleted uranium and white phosphorus in Iraq? Those Christians harp on the love of Jesus for humanity as the war criminals in DC plan the invasion of Iran, or Korea, or no telling where.
The all loving god who told GW to bomb Baghdad is whispering in the ears of the sleepwalking masses as they roll down the highway in their SUVs complaining about the high price of gas. You have to wonder how many of our neighbors would be willing to nuke Iran just to bring down the price of gas so they could buy a bigger vehicle to drive to work so they can earn enough money to make payments on their shiney new vehicles.
All the phoney Christians are concerned about themselves as they say “God Bless America”. To hell with the rest of the world filled with unworthy life. Much of American society exemplifies “doubling”. Christians accept war as a solution to failed foreign policy but are willing to raise a ruckus in front of an abortion clinic.
Josef Mengele managed to slip out of Germany in 1949 and lived out his life in relative luxury in South America. He died in 1979 from accidental drowning. I wonder if Jerry Falwell shook his hand in heaven?
There is no god, there never was a god and there never will be a god except within peoples minds. I know cause the Bible tells me so.