Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
6. You didn't read it, did you? Here, I'll grab my highlighter.
Tue Feb 24, 2015, 11:16 AM
Feb 2015

I'm hoping that you'll get my point.

But a closer look at the segment reveals that Tyson and company may have in fact divised a far more effective way of disarming the science-v.-religion debate by venturing into what religious scholars sometimes classify as “public theology.” Others have rightly noted that the [div style="display:inline; background-color:#FFFF66;"]core message of the Bruno narrative isn’t that God doesn’t exist, but rather “your God is too small.”
The “your” here is directed not at believers at large, but instead implicitly pointed at the small minority of conservative Christians who continue to doggedly insist that science is somehow incompatible with religion.

And make no mistake, they are a minority. Although it receives less airtime than fundamentalist theological strains, scientifically-informed theology is norm — not the exception — among modern American Christians. For every conservative pundit or elected official who tries to use the Bible to deny climate change, polls show that there are millions more religious Americans (read: the majority of almost every faith major faith tradition) who agree that the recent string of natural disasters were the result of climate change. In fact, a recent study conducted by Rice University found that not only do roughly half of American [div style="display:inline; background-color:#FFFF66;"]evangelicals believe that “science and religion can work together and support one another,” but that evangelical scientists actually practice their religion more than evangelical Protestants in the general population.

My point is simple:
Enlightened evangelicals can embrace conflicting ideas openly and objectively.
Enlightened scientists do the same thing. Every day. As a matter of practice.

It's the closed minded nasty evangelicals, bad scientists, and the very unimaginative among us who hold rigid "my way or highway" points of view.
Sucks to be them.

I am a true believer... chillfactor Feb 2015 #1
Because religion purports to reveal truths about the universe that aren't true. AtheistCrusader Feb 2015 #2
Which raises an interesting question. bvf Feb 2015 #4
We are currently facing several existential crisis, and the Bullshit Factory, which includes Warren Stupidity Feb 2015 #10
Some of those religions are predicated upon a hoped-for future die-off. AtheistCrusader Feb 2015 #14
Wrong. Science doesn't deal in truths demwing Feb 2015 #42
Hardly. AtheistCrusader Feb 2015 #43
Absolutely and most people do not have difficulty with that at all. cbayer Feb 2015 #8
Yes, and our founding fathers showed that slavery could co-exist skepticscott Feb 2015 #3
You didn't read it, did you? Here, I'll grab my highlighter. NYC_SKP Feb 2015 #6
Disingenuous as fuck. AtheistCrusader Feb 2015 #16
73% of Catholics said "No", we aren't in the end times. Not bad! NYC_SKP Feb 2015 #36
Yeah, but they're outnumbered. AtheistCrusader Feb 2015 #37
Yup! Hey, have you ever seen this: World Religions Tree? Giant graphic. NYC_SKP Feb 2015 #38
Yawn. Yes, I know what point you THOUGHT you were making skepticscott Feb 2015 #35
Good article worth the re-read. cbayer Feb 2015 #5
When someone finds the middle ground between two camps, it pisses off the extremists... NYC_SKP Feb 2015 #7
Isn't that the truth. cbayer Feb 2015 #9
The marine mammals are so moving. NYC_SKP Feb 2015 #11
The whales are all down here, but they should be passing through your region in a couple of months. cbayer Feb 2015 #13
They contradict each other... MellowDem Feb 2015 #12
I see all the place where there's concordance. NYC_SKP Feb 2015 #17
You lost me edhopper Feb 2015 #15
To me, they aren't legitimate if they're stuck in their narrow POV. Good grief. NYC_SKP Feb 2015 #18
"Not all religions are evil Christianity, and not all Science is right." This is a nonsensical... Humanist_Activist Feb 2015 #19
I'll stick with my first post edhopper Feb 2015 #21
Science is a process, a technique for determining physical reality.. Fumesucker Feb 2015 #22
Not true at all. cbayer Feb 2015 #23
Phenomenons are things that are happening in physical reality hence they are part of it Fumesucker Feb 2015 #24
Everything that we don't understand now we call supernatural. cbayer Feb 2015 #25
Gravity is supernatural? Fumesucker Feb 2015 #26
Of course you didn't know that, because it's not true. cbayer Feb 2015 #27
I've been into astronomy since I was about seven or eight Fumesucker Feb 2015 #28
Wow! That is so cool. cbayer Feb 2015 #30
Lots of trees here where I am and some light pollution Fumesucker Feb 2015 #31
Our view is completely unobstructed and we often have a complete cbayer Feb 2015 #34
And yet you just said AtheistCrusader Feb 2015 #33
Simply not true. trotsky Feb 2015 #29
No we fucking don't. AtheistCrusader Feb 2015 #32
No we don't, that's a stupid assertion, what we don't understand now we call unknown. Humanist_Activist Feb 2015 #39
Both series(both Carl Sagan's and Neil Degrasse Tyson's, and their hosts and producers... Humanist_Activist Feb 2015 #20
Yes, but there are some here who are so gaga over NDT skepticscott Feb 2015 #40
The contrast between Dawkins and Tyson is this, their specialties... Humanist_Activist Feb 2015 #41
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»~Neil DeGrasse Tyson Show...»Reply #6