As an American, I can readily find places where science and religion intersect. We’re in the midst of a presidential election cycle where the influence of candidates’ religious beliefs on their perspective of scientific topics is fodder for discussion, research from Pew and others on science and religion questions regularly makes headlines, and we have multiple museums dedicated to religiously motivated alternatives to mainstream science. The abundance of American voices can make it challenging to remember that America is not the world. Helpfully, a new study has been published which surveyed scientists from 8 countries around the world, asking them about their views of religion. You can read the results here, or watch a talk about them below.
[Read more…] about Science Corner: Science & Faith Around the World
sociology
New Book Reviews: Christian Parenting, Religious Bias
Over at the main ESN website, we’ve recently published a couple of book reviews that you might be interested in.
Foundations of Christian Parenting
My co-blogger Tom Grosh has reviewed Wise Stewards: Philosophical Foundations of Christian Parenting by Michael W. Austin, Associate Professor of Philosophy at Eastern Kentucky University. Among the many differences between the undergraduate and grad school/faculty worlds is the change in life stages, including marriage and children. If you’re interested in integrating your faith with your parenting philosophy, you might want to check out Michael’s book. Here’s a brief quote:
Stewards do not own what they care for; rather they are entrusted with caring for something that does not belong to them. Christian parents care for children on behalf of the children, placing the children’s interests above their own. (24)
Tom Grosh’s full review provides a couple of more quotes and some reflections on parenting from other Christian academics.
Religious Bias in Academia
The question of whether there is bias against Christians in academia is difficult to discuss. Not only is it a controversial and deeply personal topic; not only do some persons on both sides of the debate feel intense persecution for their beliefs and lifestyle; but it can be difficult to find solid research on the issue. Fortunately, a number of sociologists have begun investigating the question of the religious beliefs of academics. One of the latest is George Yancey, Professor of Sociology at the University of North Texas.
My InterVarsity Faculty Ministry colleague Tom Trevethan has reviewed George’s new book, Compromising Scholarship: Religious and Political Bias in American Higher Education, which examines both qualitative and quantitative evidence of bias against religious and political conservatives among academic sociologists. A brief excerpt:
The reality is that we do have a problem with social bias in academia. It is warranted to argue about the extent to which this bias exists, but this research provides evidence of it existence. To ignore this evidence is to put one’s head in the sand and pretend that the problem does not exist. We can no longer hide behind the argument social bias is merely the unfounded charge of conservative religious and political opportunists. With this research, there is now empirical evidence documenting this bias. (137)
Tom Trevethan’s thorough review provides a fuller discussion of George’s findings, as well as a Biblical reflection on how Christians should respond to bias or even overt discrimination. I actually first learned of this book through a comment that George left here on the blog, so I’m very pleased that we’ve come full circle and been able to review it.
Just like the ESN blog, our website allows comments on articles, so I hope you’ll join the conversation about these important topics and valuable new books.
Can Scientists Talk About Religion?
Last month, I blogged about the religious discrimination lawsuit filed by astronomer Martin Gaskell against the University of Kentucky. I included a quote from Elaine Howard Ecklund’s book Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really Think about the degree to which religious scientists feel they can be open about their faith and beliefs. Now, I want to return to Ecklund’s book and discuss one of her conclusions that I have found very insightful: nonreligious scientists have an extremely limited language for discussing religious beliefs.
(BTW, the Lexington Herald-Leader has an update on Gaskell’s case. There haven’t been too many developments in the past month, but the article includes a disturbing statement from the AAUP suggesting that religious beliefs can be an issue of “disciplinary competency” in science. Yipes. I hope religious scientists who are members of AAUP will contact them to set them straight.)
In her survey of elite academic scientists, Ecklund found that nonreligious scientists have limited ability to discuss religious beliefs. She draws on sociologist Basil Bernstein’s concept of “language codes” to suggest that many scientists never progress beyond stereotypes and false assumptions about religion: [Read more…] about Can Scientists Talk About Religion?
Week in Review: Mary Meets Lou Gehrig Edition
What are you reading, watching, thinking about this week? As usual, here’s a few which have been on our mind. Let us know your thoughts on any/all of them. If you have items you’d like us to consider for the top five, add them in the comments or send them to Tom or Mike.
1. Mary and the Modern University (First Things): In light of the false perception that religion has little to do with thought, R. R. Reno (Theology, Creighton) asks:
What, then, does Christianity add to academic life? What should make teachers and students at Catholic colleges and universities–and other Christian institutions of higher education–confident in the intellectual integrity of their enterprise?
Reno offers the surprising suggestion that we look to Mary’s response to the Annunciation:
When the Angel of the Lord comes to Mary, she is told a truth–the truth of human destiny–that she cannot understand. Her response: “Behold, I am the handmaiden of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word.â€
Good stuff. (HT: Kenny Benge)
Photo credit: B Tal via Flickr
2. Vocational concerns in higher education. In addition to the material covered in The End of Philosophy? – check out the Sociology The Satisfaction Gap (Scott Jaschik. Inside Higher Ed. 8/17/2010). The article comes face-to-face with the question of how to prepare students for graduate school. In particular, student formation along with appreciation of student (possibly faculty) fancies/interest doesn’t bring to the attention of students how much research stats comprise the work of Sociology. Comment from Tom: Maybe it also indicates some loss of direction of taking some the bigger picture into consideration when engaged in Sociological research and interpretation. I’ll survey my friends in Sociology. Feel free to also post your thoughts.
Lou Gehrig, international admissions, and Richard Mouw on praying in class after the jump.
[Read more…] about Week in Review: Mary Meets Lou Gehrig Edition
Week in Review: Awe-Inspiring Blizzard Edition
What are you reading, watching, thinking about this week? As usual, here’s a few which have been on our mind. Let us know your thoughts on any/all of them. If you have items you’d like us to consider for the top five, add them in the comments or send them to Tom or Mike.
Photo Credit: Philadelphia’s Swann Memorial Fountain, blizzard-style, from Eddie Hales via Flickr. Click for a larger image.
1. Is there a place in the academy for the Christian worldview? (Jesus Creed) RJS, a regular guest blogger at Scot McKnight’s Jesus Creed blog and a science professor at a major research university, shares a recent conversation with a friend about the role of the Christian worldview in the university. A brief except:
If one accepts methodological naturalism consistently as the basis for academic inquiry and rational thought, Â it follows that Christianity and religious belief have no place in the university, or in rational discussions, except to do autopsy on them. Â We must concede that a scientific-historical understanding of Christianity must be built with no reference to the possibility that He rose from the dead. Â We must accept that our own beliefs must be explained in evolutionary and neurological terms, without reference to the possibility that they are true.
The whole thing (and the ensuing conversation) is worth reading. [Read more…] about Week in Review: Awe-Inspiring Blizzard Edition