Blog #24

            This section of Pennock’s book provokes interesting discussion as he dives into the topic of science and philosophy once again, but specifies this topic further down into the relationship between science and religion. Personally I found this section fascinating, as I have always been interested in the rather awkward coexistence between these two domains. Previously in this course, we have dived into the topic of science and philosophy, and since then we have highlighted the importance of the coexistence of these two fields. However, this chapter of Pennock’s book is of particular interest as it depicts a side full of conflict between science and philosophical schools of thought.

            Notably, Pennock depicts the conflict between science and religion via historical events, one of them being the story of Galileo’s discovery/theory of a heliocentric universe, which starkly contrasted Christian teachings of a geocentric universe. In going against religious thought, Galileo was criticized and eventually tried for his “crime” and was found guilty of heresy even though he presented this thought using empirical evidence. This example really shows the reader that this conflict has recurred throughout history on multiple occasions, and is even a debated topic even now.

            This portion of the chapter resonated something with me personally as an aspiring health professional. Within this environment, specifically in the close-knit community of Lyman Briggs College, we have been trained to adapt certain values, regardless of our personal views on the topic. Personally, I am indeed religious, but entering Lyman Briggs, my fellow peers and I have been trained to understand that evolution is a known event. If on an exam, there was a question regarding evolution, as science majors, we were required to answer the question “correctly” meaning that evolution has occurred, regardless of religious viewpoints. In general, anything in my science classes have been distanced from any sort of philosophical thought, which has allowed us to grow and flourish in one domain, but I believe that scientific classes should always incorporate philosophical schools of thought into their topics to add dimension to the concept at hand.

It is a common stereotype within the scientific community that “true” scientists must be atheists in order to achieve credibility, however, I believe that philosophical religious thought should be considered when approaching a scientific topic, as religion brings up many ethical issues at hand. One example of this is genetic engineering of organisms, where scientists are generally eager to pursue this new tool, but due to religious beliefs, many within and beyond the scientific community remain that skepticism that is vital when considering the use and application of a potentially dangerous tool.

Religion is a sensitive subject within the scientific realm, as it is often approached tentatively with equal amounts of caution and skepticism. This begs the question; to what extent should science and philosophy remain intertwined? If religion is mixed in with empirical evidence, will that hinder or advance scientific development?