Concordat

Where is space for agnostics, say, in the wise sense of T.H. Huxley, who coined the word in identifying such open-minded skepticism as the only rational position because, truly, one cannot know.

Nonetheless, they purport to have great respect for religion.

This subject has always fascinated me, beyond almost all others (with a few exceptions, like evolution, paleontology, and baseball). Much of this fascination lies in the stunning historical paradox that organized religion has fostered throughout Western history, both the most unspeakable horrors and the most heartrending examples of human goodness in the face of personal danger.

I understand a respectful, even loving, concordat between the magisteria of science and religion, on moral and intellectual grounds, not a merely diplomatic solution. However, this cuts both ways. If religion can no longer dictate the nature of factual conclusions residing properly within the magisterium of science, then scientists cannot claim higher insight into moral truth from any superior knowledge of the world’s empirical constitution. This mutual humility leads to important practical consequences in a world of such diverse passions. So, who would do well to embrace the principle and enjoy the consequences.

~ by Natalie on 22 April.