November 2014
Volume XXII, Issue II
The Fenwick Review
The Independent Journal of Opinion at the College of the Holy Cross http://college.holycross.edu/studentorgs/fenwickreview/index.html
@FenwickReview
Catholics Love Science Eric Kuhn ’16 Staff Writer In selecting Neil deGrasse Tyson as its 2014 speaker, the Hanify Howland Committee made a bold and provocative choice. Dr. Tyson is one of the foremost authorities on astronomy and is currently the director of the Hayden Planetarium at the Rose Center for Earth and Space. He is well known for lecturing on astronomy since the age of 15. In 2000 People designated Dr. Tyson “the sexiest astrophysicist alive.” He has an interesting story to tell and is an inspiration for anyone exploring the sciences. Our speaker is also well known, however, for his outspokenness on another subject: the place of people of faith in the scientific community as well as the place of faith in the public
square. Dr. Tyson has stated his position in popular essays, including “The Perimeter of Ignorance” and “Holy Wars.” In them he brashly states, “Let there be no doubt that as they are currently practiced, there is no common ground between science and religion.” This statement should be especially concerning in a liberal arts college, in which the goal is to promote, as much as possible, the interrelation between religion and the hard sciences. In interviews, Dr. Tyson has asserted that he is by no means a militant atheist but an “I don’t really care atheist.” This stance is actually rather refreshing when compared with overly polemical people like Richard Dawkins. To suppose that a scientist’s religious faith is detrimental to the pursuit of science, however, is questionable and shows an ignorance of
The Good, The Bad, And The Pragmatic ..........Page 6
history. It appears that he is painting with a wide brush when he derides religious people. Dr. Tyson characterizes faithful people and scientists as overly credulous and somewhat ridiculous. Some books such as The Physics of Immortality suggest that “the laws of physics might allow you and your soul to exist long after you are gone from this world.” I see this idea as pseudo-scientific pandering. It is true that some scientists do find it very lucrative lecturing to Evangelicals, but Dr. Tyson should not attack the least theologically-rich proponents of religion to make his point. He not only criticizes Evangelicals but also extends his scrutiny to such a revered scientific figure as Sir Isaac Newton, who “penned more words about God and religion than about the laws of physics.” He
argues that Newton fails as a scientist by invoking God to explain complicated natural problems. While some would call this a sign of humility and a recognition of the limits of human knowledge, Dr. Tyson regards it as intellectual infantilism. Admittedly, Newton was wrong in trying to find the answers to natural phenomena in the Bible, and unfortunately people continue to do this in the present day. The Catholic Church, however, from its earliest times has tried to avoid interpreting the Bible literally. St. Paul writes, “The letter kills but the spirit gives life.” Galileo chimed in aptly, “The Bible does not tell how the heavens go, but how to go to Heaven.” Continued on page 8
A Hammer in a World With Few Nails ......Page 8