I’m engaged in battle again this next week, on 7 February, on the University of Minnesota Twin Cities campus. This one is going to be very different than that last one, though; the other side isn’t some ignorant wacko, but will be Loyal Rue, a Templeton award winner, and someone who has a rather more nuanced (I’m tempted to say “fluffy”) vision of religion. I suspect that it will be much, much less antagonistic, and more of an open discussion.

The questions we’ll be debating discussing are:

• Are the religious and scientific worldviews (or epistemologies) antithetical to one another?

• Are the processes of scientific thought antithetical to the processes of religious thought?

• Are religion and science both useful in the search for truth and meaning?

• Do you think that science can inform/confirm/suggest religious “truths” or vice versa?

• Is philosophy more like a science or more like religion?

My answers will be yes, yes, no, no, neither (Hey! I’m done! Boy, that’s going to be a short debate.), but I think I’ll probably have to spend more time defining what I mean by those answers and how I interpret religion and science, and that’s where Dr Rue and I will probably slide right past each other. We’ve been corresponding a bit and we may also get into the issue of teleology and Kauffman’s recent work (about which I have very mixed feelings).

It should be fun as long as you don’t come expecting beat-downs and knife fights — come to think and argue, instead.

Many people have been sending me links to the latest comments by our charming Catholic pontiff, and I don’t know, I’m just finding the old boy increasingly irrelevant as he continues his reactionary slide into medieval thinking. More and more it’s like hearing reports of what some random homeless man in a Philadelphia subway station ranted about — it’s amusing and appalling, but it’s hard to work up the outrage to care any more. Yes, you can argue that the Pope is influential, but even there, how many self-identified Catholics pay any attention at all to what he says about contraception, for instance? But alright, once more unto the breach, etc.

So here’s what the pope babbled recently.

[Read more…]

Thanks, Revere, for making me the point man.

I didn’t even mention the crazy people whose faith was rejuvenated by an imperfect potato. Although I would agree with your policy of agreeing with me.

Sayed Perwiz Kambakhsh, a journalist in Afghanistan, has been arrested and condemned for downloading articles on the internet that are critical of Islam.

Kambakhsh, a student at Balkh University and a journalist for Jahan-e Naw (New World), was arrested in October 2007 after material he downloaded was deemed to be offensive to Islam.

Shamsur Rahman, the head of the court, told Reuters news agency: “According to… the Islamic law, Sayed Perwiz is sentenced to death at the first court.

“However, he will go through three more courts to declare his last punishment,” he said.

I would say right now that Islam is an evil and atrocious collection of obsolete myths that is a threat to human sanity and safety (along with Christianity and Judaism, the other Abrahamic afflictions), but I better not—somebody reading it in the wrong place might get arrested.

Ali G interviews four people with opinions about religion. It’s a bit hit or miss, but listen for the bit at the end.

Ali G wonders why so many nuns work as strippers on the side, and the easily offended Catholic priest says, “I don’t think you can demonstrate that statistically…it’s an absurd statement that you’ve just made. …

I would really prefer that you move off this topic because I find it offensive. It’s not documented by any kind of evidence. It’s hearsay.”

Hilarious irony there.

The North looks ever more attractive — read this excellent article on the collapse of organized religion in Canada. The numbers of church members is simply plummeting up there, a state we can only dream of bringing to pass here in the US (numbers are declining here, too, but we can hope that this is an inevitable descent and that Canada is only leading us by a few years.)

One interesting hypothesis for why it’s happening is that we can thank, in part, feminism.

Women — the traditional mainstays of institutional religion — in huge numbers abruptly rejected the church’s patriarchal exemplar of them as chaste, submissive “angels in the house” with all of the social and moral responsibility for community and family but none of the authority.

Unable to find acceptable religious role models or religious ideals that were not painful or oppressive, they reconstructed their identities as secular and sexual beings.

As they progressed into university graduate and professional schools and entered the work force, their horizons broadened and they discovered ways of serving that were more valuable than doing dishes and running church picnics.

I don’t know how solid the data is on that claim, but it’s at least intuitively attractive. Mothers are typically far more influential on their children’s religious belief than fathers, at least in my experience, so anything that draws women away from the church is going to have strong effects.

Maybe if we want atheism to succeed, we need to promote women more. Everyone thinks of Dawkins, Dennett, Harris, and Hitchens when we discuss the godless movement — but perhaps we should be giving more props to Susan Jacoby, Julia Sweeney, Ellen Johnson, Natalie Angier, Margaret Downey, even Madelyn Murray O’Hair … hey, have you noticed? There are lots of actively atheist women!