Science is about explaining the how of the natural world: how the universe began, how life originated, how the diversity of species occurred. Scientists feel no need for their work to answer why the universe exists, why we are here. For scientists, those are questions better left to philosophy, religion and after-work hours.
Perhaps creationists find theories that only answer how to be completely unsatisfactory. Maybe for creationists, any theory that doesn't answer why contains weaknesses.
Even if science could give creationists solutions to some of these issues, evolution is never going to answer their most pressing questions: Why are we here? Why were we given consciousness? What is the meaning of life? Only alternative, supernatural explanations of the natural world, the type espoused by intelligent design, can answer those questions.
Maybe evolutionists and creationists can't find common ground because they really aren't even having the same argument. Scientists are fighting to preserve their ability to answer how unimpeded by why. Creationists are fighting to have answers to why, unthreatened by answers to how.
Saturday, April 4, 2009
Science v Religion
Here's a good quote from Wired blog:-