Why Evolution is True is a blog written by Jerry Coyne, centered on evolution and biology but also dealing with diverse topics like politics, culture, and cats.
cat shame 2
February 9, 2014 • 2:06 pm
One thought on “cat shame 2”
1) how does one submit nature photos?
2) for one’s first post, he is to email you; what is your email?
3) should it be unnecessary to email you before offering a post, please consider this one:
What is wrong with coexistence of science and religion? Suppose I enjoy, and benefit from, feeling awe. Looking at nature in its majesty, seeing its beauty and perfection, noticing how plants rise up towards God (sun), how birds define gracefulness. Is that antithetical to science? If not, suppose I rise up and sing to the glory I behold? Suppose a group were to do so together, feeling somehow that the sharing adds even more? Is this not religion? Is scientific method and appreciation discouraged? Or, perhaps science is encouraged: truly seeing with awed eyes may spark questions and wonder about how it all works.
This is not to deny that religion often works to divide and promote conflict. One may recognize others’ expression of the religious as a worthy, respected ritual not one’s own, but arising from a similar place. Comparisons that elevate one over the other are odious. Is not the multiplicity of religious experience just as wondrous as the multiplicity and variety of life on earth?
If aspects of religious belief and expression “feed the good dog,” and if the bad dog can be recognized and avoided, is there harm in permitting religious expression while also valuing and promoting scientific inquiry?
1) how does one submit nature photos?
2) for one’s first post, he is to email you; what is your email?
3) should it be unnecessary to email you before offering a post, please consider this one:
What is wrong with coexistence of science and religion? Suppose I enjoy, and benefit from, feeling awe. Looking at nature in its majesty, seeing its beauty and perfection, noticing how plants rise up towards God (sun), how birds define gracefulness. Is that antithetical to science? If not, suppose I rise up and sing to the glory I behold? Suppose a group were to do so together, feeling somehow that the sharing adds even more? Is this not religion? Is scientific method and appreciation discouraged? Or, perhaps science is encouraged: truly seeing with awed eyes may spark questions and wonder about how it all works.
This is not to deny that religion often works to divide and promote conflict. One may recognize others’ expression of the religious as a worthy, respected ritual not one’s own, but arising from a similar place. Comparisons that elevate one over the other are odious. Is not the multiplicity of religious experience just as wondrous as the multiplicity and variety of life on earth?
If aspects of religious belief and expression “feed the good dog,” and if the bad dog can be recognized and avoided, is there harm in permitting religious expression while also valuing and promoting scientific inquiry?