Abstract
Some might ask what the onslaught of recent books taking on the science versus religion debate has to do with science communication. Answer: Everything (!) if you are trying to understand and possibly reach the alarming number in the antiscience public. Physical and social scientists along with journalists and popular science writers have tackled the issue of what to do about that 72% of Americans who believe in angels. Whether Islamic terrorists or Christian extremists, blind faith has a way of damming facts. Stenger, and others, argue there is a war being waged between science advocates and a power-and-control-seeking industry (from agribusiness to pharmaceutical companies to creationists) armed with a well-financed strategy to cast doubt on all science. As witnessed in the tobacco war, the EXXON and BP oil spill disasters, Carl Sagan’s forecast of “nuclear winter,” or endless pollution crises, “Scientific uncertainty becomes their foot in the door,” Stenger says. Politicians, the media, and the public, he writes, generally fail to appreciate the distinction between findings considered conclusive by a majority of experts and a process respectful of discovery. God and the Folly of Faith is poised to become the definitive book to read in order to grasp all that is at stake.
This is Stenger’s tenth book since 1988 (see www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/). And it is bound to become a classic. His clearly presented opus in 14 chapters buffered with 65 pages of notes and a rich bibliography hammers readers with why the confrontation between science and religion matters. Stenger’s history of the first scientists (atomists, Epicureans) and skirmishes with religious philosophy is accessible, at times harsh, but solidly researched. It is worth the read if only to learn about our human and animal HADD baggage: A hyperactive agent detection device, for example, scares clams back into their shells even in the absence of any real evidence of danger. According to anthropologists, even cavemen were superstitious. From shamans to priests, supernatural beliefs have bedeviled science.
As the late journalist Christopher Hitchens warned, “That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence” (God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, 2007). Manufactured uncertainty, information laundering, industry scientists cherry picking facts to persuade the media, attempts to shift the focus, incredible access to political leaders, and flat out suppression of scientific reports have become the order of the day. Journalist Chris Mooney’s The Republican War on Science (2005) remains a best seller. Prolific author John Grant (Denying Science: Conspiracy Theories, Media Distortions, and the War against Reality, 2011) argues the future depends on an educated citizenry able to think critically and recognize reliable information (see www.johngrantpaulbarnett.com). Sociologist Erich Goode (The Paranormal: Who Believes, Why They Believe, and Why It Matters, 2012) identifies what he sees as the core of the problem: “Science is not intuitively appealing; it does not resonate with common sense.” Science, it appears, tells us what we do not want to hear.
“Religious faith would not be such a negative force in society if it were just about religion,” Stenger writes. A mindset formulated in passion without evidence, he warns, allows lies to be accepted as facts. He sees the communication challenge, if the planet and humanity are to survive, as the eradication of antipathy toward science and a commitment to truth. A heady goal indeed! A summary Stenger thought: “Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings.” I feel like an “amen” is needed here.