tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post7664819129805983342..comments2023-10-24T04:29:23.693-06:00Comments on Atheist Ethicist: Sir Harold Kroto: Communicating ScienceAlonzo Fyfehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05687777216426347054noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16594468.post-75679199811791340522007-04-24T18:38:00.000-06:002007-04-24T18:38:00.000-06:00First, I congratulate you on an interesting site. ...First, I congratulate you on an interesting site. It's not your typical site of any kind. And, second, I'm not a great enthusiast of the Templeton type of message, "that the study of science is the study of God’s design – arguing that science and religion can fit together." <BR/><BR/>While it might be true that the study of science is the study of some kind of design, that's not science but a speculation outside of science. Science cannot be theistic. The second part, that science and religion can fit together is true, but only within an individual scientist, not as a part of science. Actually, while it is impossible for religion to inform science, it is reported by some religious believers that their religion is informed by science. Science has much stricter boundaries than other activities in life in order to protect its chance of a reliable outcome and it has to stay bounded by the generally accepted limits of science.<BR/><BR/>I do, however, think that Kroto shares the rather arrogant habit of his school, who is he to tell other people what they can believe and practice? It's that club rule thing that seems to be an increasing feature of the Dawkins-Harris cults. There isn't any reason for anyone to accept their authority, in fact it's kind of odd that people who believe themselves to be free thinkers would allow this kind of authority to spring up among them. As for him wishing "to encourage his fellow scientists to avoid anything that might be thought of as encouraging religion." that would be rather difficult for those scientists who happen to be religious themselves. And, contrary to another emerging orthodoxy, not all scientists are non-religious. Some of them are a lot more accomplished in the science than many of the loudest enforcers of this new set of rules that will lead to no good. Science isn't the exclusive property of atheists or agnostics anymore than morality is of religious people.olvlzlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15329638018157415801noreply@blogger.com