What happened to all the open-minded scientists - did they all go fanatic "science religious" on us?

Question

For those who require additional information:

What I am asking is: Has science itself turned into a dogmatic religious-like ideology in the custody of today’s scientists (many of whom anthropologists and paleontologists who do NOT see a least bit of conflict in considering themselves Christian Scientists)?

Not to mention, the closed-minded and political high priests of academic science who seem to get paid to regurgitate scientific axioms (subject to ever-evolving and dynamic scientific improvements and modifications) as if an unmoved mover somehow carved them in stone.

… Here’s hoping that’s explanation enough!

Answer 1

seems to be. Tis rare to find an openminded one nowadays...

Answer 2

Westernized religion has greatly influenced the deductions and theorems that modern day scientists follow. As a geneticist, it is a constant struggle to keep religious fanaticism out of the workplace and focus on the root of why I entered this field. Westernized religion is also so ingrained into our society that many forget there are alternative views in thinking, such as Eastern culture, etc. If one can shed their inherant Western views and accept that a true scientist looks farther than their own front door for an explaination, we would have more well-rounded theories in the science field.

Many feel that if there is no viable proof of a scientific theorem, that their religious convictions are allowed to come into play to taint any evidence to further the explanation and solidify the theory.

I am also a devout Christian, but I try to most inner core of my being to not allow my theology to interfere with my scientific processes. Some say it cannot be done, but it can.

To "prove" a scientific theory using ones religion is to me a call for Denial-based proof. As in, "Aww, forget that we can't 100% prove this theory, we'll just throw in some religious mysticism to fill in the blank areas". It is unethical and irresponsible for someone in the scientific field to do so. It also suggests, in part, laziness on the researchers behalf for not pursuing their work to fullest extent.

Hope this helps.

Geneticist- LSU (aided on the kitten cloning project)

Answer 3

Scientists are now being funded by people who are obsessed with trying to prove God doesn't exist, rather than making any real scientific progress. Remember, scientists don't make money, they rely on gifts and funding. So whoever funds them dictates what projects they work on. It used to be that a scientist could do his own research but everything is so expensive now (and you feel like a bum if you don't have all the hippest things in your house) that you have to make $50k/year just to survive. This doesn't leave much time for true science.

Answer 4

Science ISN'T dogmatic.

Any scientist will readily admit all their claims are defeasible. Which means, given satisfying evidence to the contrary, they would adopt new beliefs and discard the old.

Religion doesn't do this. Religion claims there are absolutely certain truths, which are beyond our level of empirical science, and hence totally unfalsifiable. That is the rigid, onerous core of religious belief. No scientist does this.

Answer 5

A number of them spent the past week in Toronto, presenting the latest research on HIV/AIDS prevention and cures. Even though I had no part in the conference, I must confess to being rather proud of my adopted hometown for hosting it.

Real scientists are still around; but the political attack on science makes good news headlines, that's why you hear so much about it.

Answer 6

Science has lost it's academic, civic, and collectively responsible freedom, and therefore abilities! Private fund raisers perhaps don't work for them as the cost of science includes erroding foundations of private assistance. Scientists that depend on funding from sources they DON'T create, or serve, seem judged as taking advantage of the efforts of others with very sparse, if any, recognition for the benefits provided.

Unless scientific progress overcomes perceived judgment toward obvious failure of 'expensed' outcomes, already heavily invested in, it will continue to be considered a 'good money after bad' investment on the levels of available support.

Religions generally offer a unity of support sources WITH manipulating elements of 'conditional' support. That science has fallen under the dictating abilities of religion comes as no surprise since it takes unified sources of support to fund efforts of research that makes no money, and makes very little progress. Complicate that with disrespect, or devaluating of its sources of financial support ~ wala unsupported science.

This represents why science turns to government support, often with claims of unjust availability of support. Private support remains more than available, just not readily available to science projects that don't value, or respect the sources.

Answer 7

I agree with Roman S. Our current administration has raised the level of religious fanaticism in the US (or at least let them all out of the closet). As scientists rise to defend truth and reason, they become more visible. They're more visible today because they've had to come out of their labs in a just cause against willful ignorance.

Answer 8

no scientist does this.

bush administration is the religious freaks, the scientists are being hampered financially and with all this new research and stem cell activity they're trying to get heavily initiated... in comes bush and his backwards 'intelligent design' crap and throwing all the funding into the war(s) instead.

the scientists are there, they're just not making themselves visible to bush's evil eye.

Answer 9

No, they fell under the influence of the almight dollar, controlled by special interests with their own personal agendas... to control and make wealth. Don't you know that it is far more lucrative to maintain illnesses, diseases and sicknesses than it is to cure them?

Answer 10

Word~ Money