Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-lymph!arndt
From: arndt@lymph.DEC
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Science as Religion
Message-ID: <3158@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 17-Jul-85 12:30:43 EDT
Article-I.D.: decwrl.3158
Posted: Wed Jul 17 12:30:43 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 18-Jul-85 20:22:59 EDT
Sender: daemon@decwrl.UUCP
Organization: DEC Engineering Network
Lines: 42


Just a passing quote to comment on my statements that doing Science is a
bottem a 'religious' task.

I am finishing an interesting book, SCIENCE AND CREATION, by Stanley L. Jaki,
a Phd in physics and theology.  The premise of the book is that 'science' as
we know it rose only under the Christian world-view.  A statement Whitehead,
Oppenheimer and others have made as well.  Anyway, it is not light reading
and seems to be well researched.  Food for thought at least.

The interesting passage is as follows:

Speaking of the missuse of science (atom bomb, etc.) he says,

"Some of the most sensitive of these physicists have become so much appalled
by the diabolical transformation of the products of science into tools of
destruction as to hint that were it possible for them to start their career
anew it would not have anything to do with science."

"Out of such dispair arose, however, a more comforting symptom as well.  It is
the steadily growing realization that the man of science, no less than his
counterpart in religion, lives ultimately by faith.  With the mirage of
positivism now being unmasked, it is easier to recognize that the scientific
enterprise rests on a conviction which presupposes far more on man's part than
the mere juxtaposition and correlation of the data observation.  The conviction
in question is nothing short of a faith which, like religious faith, consists
in the readiness of going beyond the immediately obvious. The step is not simplya glib conjecture about a deeper layer.  (a la Rosen's claims!)  It is rather
a recognition of the indispensible need of such a layer if the scientific
enterprise is to make any lasting sense.  It is in that deeper layer that 
notions like the intelligibility, simplicity, and lawfulness of nature are
taking on a meaning which demands absolute, unconditional respect and
acceptance.  It is that deeper meaning which science must command if its laws
should be considered not merely clever manipulations of terminology and data,
but a concrete encounter with the real structure of nature." P356.

See also (someone - I haven't looked it up yet.  Anyone care to do so and give
us a report???) his article on the "The Role of Faith in Physics", ZYGON,2
(1967):187-202.

Keep chargin'

Ken Arndt