Skeptics and True Believers: The Exhilarating Connection Between Science and Religion

by Chet Raymo

Book Overview

Years ago, noted science teacher and writer Chet Raymo embarked upon his own quest to reconcile the miracle stories he learned as a child with the science he learned as an adult. "Skeptics and True... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0802775640
• ISBN13: 9780802775641
• Release Date: April 1999
• Publisher: Walker Books
• Length: 288 Pages
• Weight: 0.70 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.7" x 5.0" x 8.0"

Customer Reviews

The Common Link Between Religion and Science

The link is awe and admiration of creation and a reverence for all life from the micro to the macro. Although brought up in Catholicism, Raymo was later schooled in science (physics and astronomy) and has been attempting to rectify the rifts between religion and science ever since. This he does just about as good or better than anyone. In "Skeptics and True Believers", one will find close parallels to the writing of environmentalist Thomas Berry, biologist E.O. Wilson, et al. Raymo's writing style is lyrical, poetic, anecdotal, scholarly and very insightful- most of all, compelling. One will find this book full of great citations with his own thoughts thrown in, such as: ["Put on your jumping shoes," cried the fourteenth-century mystic Meister Eckhart, "which are intellect and love." Religion without science is idolatrous. Science without religion might be even more dangerous: amoral power without constraint, without wisdom, without love.] Indeed! And Raymo's take on reductionism: "No theory conceived by the human mind will ever be final. The universe is vast, marvelous, and deep beyond our knowing; its horizons will always recede before our advance. All dreams of finality are (probably) futile." Although skeptical of the efficacy of some of Pierre Teilhard de Chardin's conclusions in the "Phenomenon of Man", he concurs with him with: [He insisted that the surest way to know God is through his creation, and the truest knowledge of creation is that provided by contemporary science. "Less and less do I see any difference now between research and adoration."]. And with that, keep in mind that Teilhard was a French Benedictine Monk and paleontologist /geologist who often ran afoul of the church for his thoughts, so he left his works to a friend in the U.S. to be published posthumously. Although I read this great work of Raymo's almost 2 years ago, I was inspired to write this review after reading his latest book, "Climbing Brandon" which is a continuation of his efforts to balance religion and science and he wrote that book while residing at his second home on Ireland's Dingle Peninsula near the foot of Mt. Brandon. It is a beautiful piece of work and makes a fine sequel to "Skeptics".

Skeptics, True Believers, and for those in between as well

Chet Raymo grew up Catholic, as did I. Through his life of studying science, he valued the scientific search for Truth. That brought him, as many scientists, to face the apparent dichotomy between science and religion. Raymo interestingly takes that "science vs. religion" apart, and reconstructs it as "Skeptics vs. True Believers", and in doing so, examines the human aspect of the conflict as well as the more ubiquitous aspects. The whole creation vs. evolution argument has gotten worn out, and it's replacement, "intelligent design" vs. evolution has gotten equally abused. Raymo makes his case briefly (thankfully), and goes on to face *why* people seem to have the need to be either Skeptical (doubtful despite evidence) or True Believers (faithful in spite of contrary evidence).Raymo came to what I call a "full basket" moment with his Catholicism -- either he had to buy the full basket, accept and believe it all, or he could believe none of it. For other people, readily acknowledged by Raymo, the full basket moment is not an all-or-nothing. For some of us, it is, instead, a turning point. This is why I mention "those in between" in the title of this review.For those of us who cringe at the negative connotations of the "Skeptic" title, and cringe equally at the naivete implied in "True Believers"; for those of us who don't buy the full basket of the beliefs of our church and religion, but still find great value in that religion -- this is a valid place to be. Raymo does not ignore that, and that is specifically the human aspect of the dichotomy that mixes the black and white to live in the gray area. Perhaps "avoids" rather than "mixes".A Raymo very eloquently discusses, humanity is the only earthly life that is brutally, painfully aware of its mortality. Religion is the primary psychological force dealing with (or avoiding?) that mortality, promising life after death, through death, through reincarnation. Religion is a home for morality instruction, for rituals, for change-of-life ceremonies and celebrations. Religion has a tribal aspect, a belonging that is much needed by the human psyche, which no amount of skepticism, science, or knowledge of facts can replace. While the title and much of the book is set up to explore the dichotomy, pinning one side *against* the other, it does just as much, perhaps unintentionally or perhaps not, blending the two sides together into a place where one can be comfortable with both. This book might be written as Raymo's attempt to find that place for himself.I give it five stars. Whether Raymo has found that place of balance for himself or not, his exploration of the topic is well written, interestingly prepared, and very thought provoking.

The Interface Between Science and Religion

Chet Raymo has always been one of my favorite authors. I read his "365 Starry Nights" with a fascination that I have had for few books. After reading Kenneth Miller's "Finding Darwin's God" I was quite receptive to getting Raymo's take on the interface between science and religion in his book "Skeptics and True Believers." I was not disappointed. Raymo's thesis is that there needs to be a connection between religion and science that does not contradict solid scientific results and concepts. Raymo is clear in his writing and, among other things, rightly attacks the muddled postmodern concept that all ideas are equal. You cannot argue that Ptolemy's construct of epicycles is as good an idea as Copernicus' sun-centered system. This is utter nonsense. Science at its best does seek the closest approximation of "truth" at a given time and is also at its best a self-correcting system. Thus you cannot really have a conservative or liberal science. The Nazis tried to have an Aryan science and the Communists in the former Soviet Union tried to have a Socialist science, but they both failed miserably. This inability to be ultimately used for political purposes is one of the main strengths of science and what separates it from absolute belief systems. Raymo also takes on strict reductionism, which is (as he points out) pretty close to a faith-, a faith that you can explain the universe in a final relatively simple theory of everything. Even Stephen Hawking has apparently given up on this idea (although he espoused it quite emphatically in his "A Brief History of Time.") The problem is the mind-boggling complexity of the universe and of the development and structure of life. Still, reductionism has served us well in the laboratory- it just does not take on the biggest problems easily. Perhaps one day we will know everything there is to know, but I think that we will be buried in mountains of data long before that day dawns. I do partially disagree with Raymo on one point. While I think that he is absolutely correct that quantum physics cannot be used to "prove" the existence of God or of a spirit world, the chance effects of quantum theory could serve a basis for free will, as Roger Penrose suggests. I am not convinced that quantum events never affect events at larger scales, as Raymo thinks. However only time and more knowledge will settle that one. It may be, as Raymo says, that quantum events are swamped at larger scales. It may even be that at our level apparently indeterminate events become determinant if an infinite number of these events are summed. This is the "coin tossing" paradox- we cannot predict the outcome of a particular coin toss, but if you make a large number of tosses the ratio will be nearly 50-50 and if you made an infinite number the 50-50 ratio would be absolutely determined. However, I think that dispensing with free will completely (as some recent authors do, but Raymo does not) makes a mockery of science itself,

Fun reading for anyone interested in science and religion.

Raymo does a great job of discussing many of the age-old tensions between religious belief and scientific skepticism. Our need for belief is rooted in our biology, and often leads our thinking astray. Raymo covers much of the same territory as covered by Carl Sagan, Steven Weinberg, Richard Dawkins, Victor Stenger, and EO Wilson, but in his own inimitable style. I enjoyed his discussions of Ockham's razor (parsimony), the bankrupt naming schemes of earlier eras which lead to so much confusion, arguments from incredulity, compartmentalized thinking ("we are riven"), etc. His approach is eclectic and inclusive, and moves from logical problems to poetry which resonates with the subject. An enjoyable read, best typified by quotes such as "science is founded on the twin cornerstones of skepticism and astonishment ...reasoned skepticism does not preclude passionate belief, and astonishment is enhanced by knowledge."

A mystical marriage of knowing and believing

The Kirkus review of Raymo's elegant tome misses the mark. As a degreed church musician who is also an ordained minister, I comprehend Raymo's longing for a liturgical celebration of life's mysteries based in our knowledge of the natural laws of the universe. Most church services are based on anti-scientific theologies that leave a thinking person little integration between her everyday world and that of the Sunday service. The Kirkus reviewer is quick to disparage Raymo as a deist! Strictly-speaking, a deist still sees a God who is anthropormorphic, one who sets the universe in motion and then sits back dispassionately to watch from a distance. Raymo's Creator would be a part of the on-going , continuing flow of what we call life, more in keeping with Meister Eckhart's God with whom we are co-creators. We expand our physical knowledge, our mental understanding, and our consciousness by sinking into ourselves, becoming all we can be through bending with life, ! becoming " more" alive. Few writers embrace the so-called scientific worlds and religious worlds as well as Raymo. The Kirkus reviewer only serves to further the Cartesian split, not to heal it.