I read Torrey Meeks’ article about science trumping religion, and I couldn’t help but wonder what might spawn such righteous indignation.Her article, Science Trumps Religion; Here’s Why It’s Dog Days for God, is essentially a diatribe about how people of all religions don’t have any ground to stand on. She professes over and over the science wins out in the apparent battle between science and God, and she seems to specifically talk about Christianity, though she also mentions other religions such as Islam, Judaism and Hinduism.
I do not consider myself a Christian because I don’t go to church and because I’ve never bought certain things that Christians believe. However, I would never be so arrogant as to say, without equivocation, that God does not exist, especially when the alternative is a science that is wholly underdeveloped. I would also never be so brazen as to ridicule anyone for having faith, as I find it both brave and humbling to know that so many human beings have reverence for something they cannot prove to exist.
In Meeks’ second paragraph, she states that, “From a purely scientific standpoint you can’t disprove the existence of god.” She pays with semantics by talking about how true atheists cannot exist, but that someone who does not believe in God is simply a very devout agnostic. She leads off her next sentence by saying, “Mostly because he doesn’t exist…” Apparently, Torrey Meeks is so omniscient that she can say — without any thought to the possibility she might be wrong — that God does not exist.
She also claims that science is the agnostics’ turf, something that couldn’t possibly be proved, and is actually probably wrong. I’ve known many scientifically-minded individuals who are devout believers in God, as well. They accept what science proves to the world, but not without a reverence and respect for a higher power. That is something that I can understand, as believing that humans are the highest power in the universe is not only ignorant, but arrogant as well.
Let’s also not confuse the terms “faith” and “religion”. Meeks goes on to discuss the ideology that believes in holy texts as absolute truth. I don’t know a single person in this world who upholds all values and ideas expressed in their chosen holy text, just like I don’t know a single scientist who accepts all theories put forth throughout the ages. There has to be a common ground. While I have absolute faith in a Godlike power that watches over humanity, I don’t believe that everything said in the Bible is fact; in fact, I’d venture to say that much of it is personal accounts told by men just like you and me, men who were not necessarily influenced by God or Jesus or anyone else.
You see, Torrey Meeks, faith is not about religious relics or holy texts; it’s about the belief that something more exists in this world. Everyone has witnessed something that they cannot explain; whether that has to do with some cosmic force that intervenes in our lives, I don’t know. However, I’m not so arrogant as to discount the possibility.
Meeks also says that, “There is not room for two sources of ultimate truth in the Universe. One is ultimate, the other is irrelevant.” Truth…with a capital “T”. Can truth really even exist? Science is just as much a religion as Christianity and Buddhism, and much of science has been created by man, just like religious ceremonies and traditions. For example, when you wake up in the morning, you believe with absolute certainty that an inch will still be an inch and a mile will still be 5,280 feet. You believe that the gauge on your thermometer is reading the correct temperature and you assume that the gravitational force holding us onto this plane will continue to do its job.
Further, truth is largely defined by human perception. For example, let’s talk about the five senses, which are each scientific “discoveries”. How something tastes, smells, feels, looks or sounds will be the same no matter who is making the observation, but the comments made by individual people will be different because of human perception. The same goes for a conversation that you have with your friend. What actually happens is the truth, but how you each relate the conversation later might be largely different. Again: human perception.
So what’s the point? The point is that science is largely a leap of faith in and of itself. We continue to believe it because it doesn’t change, though things certainly have changed over the years. And let’s not forget that much of what science puts forth in medical journals and hardcover books is based entirely on scientific theory rather than actual, proven fact.
This leads me to my next point, which is when Torrey Meeks says, “Saying, ‘I know he exists because I can feel him in my heart,’ is not good science, and by saying we can’t disprove the existence of god you’ve brought the argument onto scientific ground. So sorry. You lose.” This disturbs me on many levels. First, are you telling me that you do nothing and feel nothing unless it can be scientifically measured and quantified? Do you love your parents? Your children? Your friends? Do you get angry when someone lies to you? Anger, love, jealousy, hatred…none of these things can be measured or quantified, and yet we know they exist because we feel their effects.
In Meeks’ next list of contentions, there are a few things with which I can wholeheartedly agree. First, I think that it’s wonderful children are starting to challenge the things that their parents and society teaches them. I’m all for free thought and individual thinkers; I don’t believe in “indoctrinating” anything into our children. However, I do believe that it is the job of parents to instill moral, ethical and spiritual values in their children. You can’t learn those things from a cold, impersonal computer screen any more than you can learn faith from a holy text. It isn’t all about knowledge; it’s also about those things that make us human: compassion, empathy, pain, sympathy and understanding.
Next, Meeks goes on to make this contention: “Let’s take a look at the profile of the typical homeschooling parent in America. They’re usually religious fundamentalists who believe that an education with a science curriculum stating the viability of evolution will pollute their child’s brain.”
Let’s talk about fact and truth for just one minute; can I see your list of sources here? I did some of my own research, and I discovered that your contentions are not true at all. First “In every subject and at every grade level of the ITBS and TAP batteries, homeschool students scored significantly higher than their counterparts in public and private schools.” (Rudner study). Secondly, according to the National Institute for Education Statistics, 48.9% of parents homeschool their children because they believe they can impart a better education at home, not for religious reasons (nces.ed.gov).
Perhaps Meeks should have actually studied the scientific “facts” for which she is such an advocate before making her claims.
And finally, I want to comment on the venom with which Meeks outlines her position on God and science. I don’t have anything against science, as I’m sure is true of the majority of “religious bulldogs”; however, I do take issue with anyone who feels the need to insult, undermine and berate the beliefs of others.
It isn’t your place, Torrey Meeks, to tell people what does and does not exist, because you yourself do not know. You can’t.
