The truth of science

Published: Friday | May 22, 2009



Yesterday The Gleaner published a letter written by Michael Dingwall promoting the religion of atheism. In free societies like ours we must defend Dingwall's right to be atheist, and to promote his religion, but we must not support him when he departs from truth, fact or logic.

Dingwall writes: "Unlike Christianity and Rastafarianism, one's brain is not held captive by atheism, which offers one the liberation of the mind and the freedom to think … . This freedom of thought is the very foundation of science. Indeed, science, in its purest form, is atheistic … The scientific innovations that made (sic) our modern lives possible are products of free thought - this is atheism at work."

Brother Dingwall is claiming that the minds of Christians are so "held captive" by their belief in God that scientific innovation is impossible or unlikely. I would like to make the opposite claim: that almost all modern scientific innovations have emerged from the minds of practising believers in God. The theory of relativity came from the mind of Albert Einstein, a practising Jew; the theory of evolution came from the mind of Charles Darwin, an ordained Anglican priest; the science of genetics came from the mind of Gregor Mendel, a Roman Catholic priest and monk, who did his experiments on peas when he was in charge of the monastery kitchen. In our own land, our Nobel laureate, Professor Anthony Chen, is a practising Roman Catholic Christian. The idea that belief in God somehow blocks a person from scientific brilliance is plain nonsense. One thing is clear: being atheist does not guarantee that one will think clearly and logically.

Positivism and empiricism

I don't know if Dingwall is a scientist; I rather doubt it, for scientists are not free to think in any way they wish. Scientists are trained to follow 'the scientific method' following the philosophical approaches known as positivism and empiricism. There is much truth to be learned following this method. A scientist who departs from the use of rational thinking is a poor scientist, and may come to false (and dangerous) conclusions. And so the brain of a scientist is 'held captive' by positivism and empiricism, just as the brain of an atheist is 'held captive' by a rejection of anything resembling faith in God.

Theologians are trained to follow 'theological method' - the application of rational thinking to matters of faith. The 'data' of science and theology are different; science only accepts as 'data' matters which are observable by the senses and objectively measurable by instruments, while, in addition to that, theology also accepts data obtained from 'revelation'. In addition to positivism and empiricism, theology also uses approaches from phenomenology and what is called hermeneutics.

To say that the natural sciences are atheistic (as Dingwall does) is to say no more than to say that biology is ungeological. Different sciences have different spheres of interest and expertise.

Dingwall goes on to say that "this conviction of mine is not resting on faith - but certainty". Again, Dingwall reveals his profound lack of understanding of the nature of scientific truth and certainty. Very little about the natural sciences is 'deterministic' that would lead to 'certainty'. Even today, the existence of atoms and molecules remains a 'theory'; quantum mechanics is a system of mathematical probabilities which has a remarkable ability to predict what is actually observed, but scientists do not declare that quantum mechanics is 'true'; it is useful because it works.

True scientists are tentative, and speak in 'probabilities' and 'tendencies' rather than in certainties, and to claim otherwise is to try to make a religion out of science.

Michael Dingwall's letter in yesterday's Gleaner shows that he is searching for truth, and that he believes that the truth he has found through the natural sciences is the whole truth. Dingwall needs to liberate his mind from the captivity of a narrow scientism; he may yet experience truths which will make him really free!

Peter Espeut is a chemist, a sociologist and a Roman Catholic deacon. Feedback may be sent to columns@gleanerjm.com.