I am, for the most part, a rationalist. That qualifier troubles many scientists--how can you be anything less than 100% of a rationalist? I must admit that what I enjoy most about science is the rigor and discipline of the scientific method as much as the discoveries that it generates. As strange as it may seem now, there was a point in my career where I was enthralled by that most elegant language of all--abstract algebra--and actually devoured books on quantum mechanics. I guess my future in geekdom was assured from an early age.
Faith, by definition, is irrational. It cannot rest on quantifiable, empirical data. There are attempts to use some scientific principles in explaining certain facets of faith (hence, my interest in apologetics), but they can get pushed to the extreme, as in the case of intelligent design being touted as a branch of science.
I don't have any problems with my faith coexisting with science--in fact, each is often strengthened by the other. As Einstein said:
"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." Much has been made of Einstein's belief in God, or lack thereof. If you're curious, check out God and Science. It's an interesting site overall, whether you're mildly curious about apologetics or passionately committed to studying it.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Yin and yang
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
wow, this looks like an interesting site. We had a series of study sessions this year on "faith and science."
I remember a conversation in the car with my dad more than 30 years ago in which I tried to make the case that faith is irrational. I was making a plea that being irrational is okay! He, a lawyer and a Methodist, didn't seem to want to admit that possibility, nor to unpack what he really thought or believed about God. (I think I was a difficult child.)
Songbird, a difficult child? You and me both :)
For me it all boils down to allowing mystery to enter in to the internal conversation. Thanks for the link.
Post a Comment