Taking an antagonistic view of religion and not formally publically thwacking the hysteria of scientists who hate religion has inculculated a generally sullen and quiet dislike of science, in particular biology and physics, among many, many christians. And most christians live in a post-Enlightenment viewpoint. Much of Islam does not seem to even have that post-Enlightenment view.
Allowing famous scientists to take a generally antagonistic approach towards all religion without nuance ill served science, resulting in current views among religious types.
If scientists want to be accepted with Christians in particular, they need to be more nuanced about amusing things like evolution, for instance. Taking that example, it is a little publicized fact that evolution as currently stated - stripping out the philosophy - is a logical explanation for variation on genetics. But, no. Everyone has to add on philosophy/beliefs to it and suddenly it's A Religion Which You Agree/Disagree Choose One.
no subject
Taking an antagonistic view of religion and not formally publically thwacking the hysteria of scientists who hate religion has inculculated a generally sullen and quiet dislike of science, in particular biology and physics, among many, many christians. And most christians live in a post-Enlightenment viewpoint. Much of Islam does not seem to even have that post-Enlightenment view.
Allowing famous scientists to take a generally antagonistic approach towards all religion without nuance ill served science, resulting in current views among religious types.
If scientists want to be accepted with Christians in particular, they need to be more nuanced about amusing things like evolution, for instance. Taking that example, it is a little publicized fact that evolution as currently stated - stripping out the philosophy - is a logical explanation for variation on genetics. But, no. Everyone has to add on philosophy/beliefs to it and suddenly it's A Religion Which You Agree/Disagree Choose One.