Spring Break
Hopkins students and faculty balance science and religion
Issue date: 5/1/08
Ball pointed out that the speaker at the founding of Hopkins was T.H. Huxley, prominent scientist known as "Darwin's bulldog" because of his support of evolutionary theory.
Ball expects his students to keep with the scientific tradition, especially since he discusses evolution in his classes.
"Creationism in terms of a theory that can explain biological phenomena isn't really viable right now, so there aren't real serious attempts to test creationist ideas, and there are attempts to question current ideas about evolution. These will continue, as they should in any healthy science," Ball said.
But scientists must see the limitations of their studies, Falk said. Science can answer many questions, but not all of them.
"Science does not pretend to answer the question why are we here. Faith is, almost by definition, that set of beliefs one has about the world for reasons that are other than one's observation of it," he said.
"I think in a lot of ways, science can talk about the how, and religion and God can talk about the why," Hopkins Fellowship of Christian Athletes President Matt Benchener said.
For him, it was important to seek solutions for more abstract ontological questions in addition to scientific ones, which led him to becoming a Christian several years ago in hopes of answering, "Where did it come from?"
He recalled being an evolution enthusiast in high school and later tempering his ideas after becoming a Christian.
Benchener believes that microevolution is valid because it is observable, but thinks that the theory of macroevolution needs to be further questioned.
According to Benchener, certain tenets such as analogous structures in animals did not seem valid.
He cited that Darwin himself admitted that his theory could never be proven unless the entire fossil record was found, which is not close to happening.
Peter Achinstein, professor of philosophy of science, taught an experimental course on the controversy several years ago entitled Special Topics in Philosophy of Science: Evolution vs. Intelligent Design.
Ball expects his students to keep with the scientific tradition, especially since he discusses evolution in his classes.
"Creationism in terms of a theory that can explain biological phenomena isn't really viable right now, so there aren't real serious attempts to test creationist ideas, and there are attempts to question current ideas about evolution. These will continue, as they should in any healthy science," Ball said.
But scientists must see the limitations of their studies, Falk said. Science can answer many questions, but not all of them.
"Science does not pretend to answer the question why are we here. Faith is, almost by definition, that set of beliefs one has about the world for reasons that are other than one's observation of it," he said.
"I think in a lot of ways, science can talk about the how, and religion and God can talk about the why," Hopkins Fellowship of Christian Athletes President Matt Benchener said.
For him, it was important to seek solutions for more abstract ontological questions in addition to scientific ones, which led him to becoming a Christian several years ago in hopes of answering, "Where did it come from?"
He recalled being an evolution enthusiast in high school and later tempering his ideas after becoming a Christian.
Benchener believes that microevolution is valid because it is observable, but thinks that the theory of macroevolution needs to be further questioned.
According to Benchener, certain tenets such as analogous structures in animals did not seem valid.
He cited that Darwin himself admitted that his theory could never be proven unless the entire fossil record was found, which is not close to happening.
Peter Achinstein, professor of philosophy of science, taught an experimental course on the controversy several years ago entitled Special Topics in Philosophy of Science: Evolution vs. Intelligent Design.
Be the first to comment on this story