The basic idea of the conference is kind of like any religious conference, "How do we make our ideas be the only ones accepted?" The majority of the people involved try to make the point that religion impedes science, therefore impedes the economy, discoveries, and mankind. But even as Dr. Neil make the point that all the major scientists (that he mentioned at least) that have made some of the most significant impacts on humanity, our understanding, and reason and science, have all believed in an Intelligent Designer to our universe. Galileo, Newton, Huggens, etc. have all attributed what was unknown to someone bigger who has made it happen.
I think that his very point that religion impedes science because these men were religious and didn't learn more is self-contradicting. These men were religious and had beliefs about an Intelligent Designer and they advanced science more than any other men in their time. Does this not prove that one can believe in a God and yet still contribute on the highest of levels in science? The more we find out in science, the more questions are brought out. Will there ever be an end to what we will learn? If so, what will we do then...science will no longer be needed. If not, there will always be a mystery that cannot be solved and therefore even some of the greatest of minds will inevitably (as history has proven) believe in a God or/and Intelligent Designer of some sort.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment