Dawkins

Dawkin’s Delusion
(1) Deluded about God?
(2) Has Science Disproved God?
-the advancement of science and discovery does not equate to atheism rising or substantiating what atheism stands for -nature can be interpreted in a theistic and atheistic way; both are genuine intellectual possibilities for science -there are limits to science;

-“some ultimate questions lie beyond science” Sir Martin Rees, president of Royal society, which brings together Britain’s leading scientists -the great questions of life cannot be answered with any degree of certainty; any given set of observations can be explained by a number of theories -science cannot be mixed by interpretation

-“science explains everything” outlook is dismissed and naïve -scientific theories cannot “explain the world” but only “explain the phenomena” observed in the world. -is there purpose within nature?

How did everything begin? What are we all here for? What is the point of living? Where are we going after this? Non-overlapping magisteria of science & religion
Partially overlapping magisteria of science & religion  a realisation that science and religion offer possibilities of cross fertilisation on account of interpenetration of their subjects and methods Francis Collins; evolutionary biologist who heads up the famous Human Genome Project: “a richly satisfying harmony between the scientific and spiritual worldviews” “principles of faith is complementary to the principles of science” Owen Gingerich (leading Harvard astronomer) “this belief does not interfere with the scientific enterprise” Survey in 1997: 45% did not believe in God, 40% believed in God, 15% were unsure Trend expected where people would grow out of infancy and stop believing in God altogether proved to be false as the number stabilised through the years Atheists who say they believe in science actually bring in assumptions to their science instead of basing it on science Dawkin’s stand: religion & science at locked into a battle...