Letters to the Editor

Fuller letter: Science and religion

The April 1 religion column, “Science and religion coexist to make the world work,” seems to maintain that science can somehow be separate from a religious basis.

This is erroneous. All thought — including scientific thought — has a religious foundation. Everyone — including the scientist — has a bias.

In the June 1993 article, available online, “Saving Sick Children From State Science,” “attorney/physicist” A.M. Rogers pointed out, “The scientifically naïve believe there is truth in science....”

Peter Leithart, a graduate of Hillsdale College and Cambridge University, wrote in his article, “Creation As a Worldview,” “(W)e must recognize that all science is based on unproven assumptions which are essentially religious in nature.” And, “There is no such thing as ‘neutral observation.’ 

In his book, “Without a Prayer,” John Robbins said, “Reason can never cease to be the handmaid of faith: All thought must start somewhere, and that initial postulate is unproven by definition .... Reason is and must always be the handmaid of faith. The only question that remains is, Which faith — which axiom — shall reason serve?”

“Ota Benga: The Pygmy in the Zoo” by Bradford and Blume and Stephen Jay Gould’s “The Mismeasure of Man” (response to “The Bell Curve”) illustrate tragic results from ascribing unwarranted certainty to so-called “science.”

Violet Fuller, Nampa

  Comments