Future Visions

Today I came across this Scientific American article on a Tennessee law that just passed, allowing teachers in public schools to challenge scientific findings and theories. The article specifically addressed climate science, but the bill also covers evolution and cloning, topics which are a ‘third rail’ in public discussion these days. The implication of a teacher challenging a scientific subject is that one could refuse to teach it, or possibly even teach an alternative viewpoint, i.e. creationism. It wasn’t clear from the article just how far a teacher could go, and it may be that those boundaries have yet to be tested.

I have to question whether a teacher whose notion of challenging science is to discard it, is qualified to teach science. Because science is inherently based on the process of challenging anything and everything. Even the most basic foundation of a science is always open to challenge, if one dares to joust with it. That is why Einstein was able to put forward a theory that didn’t fit with a Newtonian theory that had stood for hundreds of years. If one wishes to challenge any scientific study or finding, the arena (of academic journals) is always open, provided your game is good enough to get you into that arena (kind of like trying to break into publishing). And like any game, there are rules, which science calls the scientific method.

Which leads to what science can teach religion about faith. Many religious adherents that I know view science as weak because with few exceptions, even the most solid constructs are called theories and open to challenge. But what they don’t understand is that scientists have a faith of their own, every bit as strong as the most passionate believer, in the scientific method. That is why even the most fundamental scientific truths are less than absolute, and that is also why science continues to advance by leaps and bounds. Because scientists are willing to examine their beliefs and modify them when confronted with inconsistencies.

As a Christian, I have spent a lot of time and effort examining my belief system, and I won’t pretend to have all the answers but the one thing I’m confident of is that no one else does either. That doesn’t mean I abandon my belief system or that I doubt God exists. It just means our understanding isn’t quite right yet. To me, faith is having the courage to acknowledge that you are probably wrong in some of your conclusions, and that you might need to revise some of those conclusions.

And that is what I think science can teach religion about faith: that it’s okay to be wrong.  Because reality doesn’t change, but our understanding of it certainly can.