Science and Religion in Conflict
On page 38 Professor
Langdon summarizes the major tension driving the plot: Science and
Religion are ‘oil and water’, arch enemies. "Since the beginning of history,”
he says, “a deep rift has existed between science and religion" (p27). But
is it really that simple? If we ignore the first problem with this claim
(science has not been around since the beginning of history) is conflict the
only manner in which the two are related? If we define religion as irrational
superstition then perhaps, but the truth is Western science emerged from within
a religious (Christian) cultural context. Galileo was a devout Catholic, and
Isaac Newton was certainly a fervent believer. Both had their problems with church
authority and orthodoxy, but they were undoubtedly religious. So conflict is
clearly not the only option. In fact, there are several proposed typologies that try to make sense of the complex relationship.
The conflict-relation in Dan Brown’s story fits because he has written rich
characters that represent extreme positions. Maximilian Kohler, the head of
CERN, is dedicated to “pure science” (p17) and perceives all religion to be a
cancer (p19). In fact, he believes that science will shortly provide answers to all
questions, including ‘what are we doing here?’ and ‘what is the meaning of the
universe?’ (p22). Similarly, the Pontiffs Camerlengo gradually reveals himself
to be skeptical of scientific research that’s not subject to church authority.
But in the real world, very few research projects exist as ‘pure science’ -
they inevitably have ethical, economic, philosophical, or even theological
implications. And a researcher’s particular orientation to ethics, economics
and philosophy will shape the work that they choose to do, and sometimes even
the theories they propose.
Dan Brown describes Vittoria and her research partner as representing a
subgroup of scientists who do not see their work as necessarily in conflict
with religion. In fact, Vittoria contradicts Kohler, acknowledging that logic
and science is “bereft of moral responsibility” (p80).
Today it’s easy to find situations where people perceive science and
religion to be in conflict, but also easy to find scientists and theologians
who believe they should exist independently, often because they join Vittoria
in recognizing that science cannot provide much help with moral challenges.
There are some who take this further and believe its possible for a creative
mutual interaction to occur.
It is quite ironic that writing twelve years before the publication of Angels
and Demons, Pope John Paul II suggested:
"Science can purify religion from error and superstition; religion
can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes. Each can draw the other
into a wider world, a world in which both can flourish."
For
more on this complex subject see:
Notes
- On page 449 the Camerlengo scoffs that science has
mistakenly condemned religion as an “opiate of the masses” which is
clearly a reference to a Karl Marx quote, but substantially out of context
since Marx was not condemning religion as a scientist.
- On page 46 Kohler says that the Superconducting Super-Collider
(SSC) project was cancelled due to protests by Bible-Belt lobbyists, but
that’s a gross mischaracterization. (More.)
Email
link | Printer-friendly | Feedback
| Contributed by: Adrian Wyard
|
