Just wondering.... I know a couple who are but I don't want to make a generalization.
I would say the majority of bilogists on PF are athiests
i wonder if that applies to physicists, psychologists and chemists and any interdisplinary field among the 4.
I'm pretty sure they are in direct disagreement with any major religion there is today, perhaps with minor exceptions pertaining to the values rather than believes. Lets face it folks - there is no such thing as hell or heaven. Or maybe there is - but who cares, really? There seems to be no logic for life itself - that is there doesnt seem to be any purpose for existence, so why should there be purpose for afterlife?
These things coupled with extremely humbling complexity of life are all too confusing for any mind. I'll even go so far as to say for any normal mind. Perhaps there is something to the "hallucinations" some drug ab/users experience - after all, those are chemicals, and we are made of similar chemicals. Who has a right to claim its not real or that it isnt credible?
Not necessarily, I know biology professors who go to church every sunday. Their believes do not interfere with the work they do everyday.
What does biology have to do with religion?
I doubt they've wasted their time and gone out and polled everyone who refers to themselves as a "biologist" to see if they are religious. Since there's no correlation... its bad statistics.
Biology has pretty much everything to do with religion.
Among scientists, the percentage of biologists professing themselves to be religious is lower than, say, among physicists and mathematicians.
This has been shown in several studies, although I'm not in a habit to store links to such studies.
I remember a survey from Nature probably, oh, seven or eight years ago now that said the majority of biologists were either agnostic or atheist. I don't remember the exact number.
All biologists believe in evolution, if that's what you're getting at.
I know quite a few biologists who are religious...Jewish, Christian or Muslim. I don't know any who are members of churches that preach against believing in evolution though, if that's what you think the conflict is.
Hmm...I know I saw some recent poll numbers on this very question. Now if only I can find it again. For now, I have this news bit from NSCE regarding the recent NY Times articles...
...which seems to indicate that 60-70% of biologists are agnostic or atheist.
Well, I think it's OK to believe in something and have some faith, but if you are a biologist and don't believe in evolution thinking "intelligent design" is true, then you shouldn't be a biologist. Simple as that.
Think you might want to go learn what religion actually is then...
I higly doubt the correlation is high in physicists, and psychologists, but biologists are defintely the top, then perhaps chemists.
Biology is the study of the subject at hand which happens to study object in question. Any questions? k thx come again
Think again. You can believe in a god and evolution at the same time. The question is not whether biologists believe in Adam and Eve, the question is whether they believe in a higher power.
Well no, Monique, the question is whether they think that actions by that higher power are necessary to the development of species, and that that necessity can be proved. That's what ID claims. But ID has been debunked, so a biologist, however devout, shouldn't be supporting it.
Maybe god made man out of monkeys, no one can prove that there is no god so why can't a biologist believe in one. ID stands separate from the discussion of believing in a god or being an atheist.
People who believe in evolution aren't per definition atheist, are they?
I believe god is the personification of the universe. Since I believe the universe exists, I believe god exists. Simple as that.
i think generally alot of scientists believe in their own style of religion, rather than being a follower to a church or something, like Einstein...
I agree with you on this. The original question asked if biologists are atheists or religious. It didn't ask anything at all about any particular religion or belief system. You can also believe in a god or gods without being religious...one may think there is no need for religious rituals to recognize the existence of their god. Believing in a god or having a religion does not require believing in intelligent design. There is no reason one can't believe there is a god and that god gave the universe a little "zap" billions of years ago to create the first matter and then sat back and watched what happened.
As long as your religion doesn't require you to believe false things about nature, there is no problem. But, firstly, ID is false, so a sincere scientist shouldn't believe in it. And secondly my experience of religion is that even if the powers that be are cool with evolution now, you have no guarantee that they will continue to be. If you acknowledge two sources of truth, religious dogma and observation, then you can expect them to diverge sometimes. Religious leaders are big about the two sources not disagreeing but what they mean by that is "All your truths are belong to us now."
I just think you're hard-headed if you're knowledgable about biology, chemistry, evolution and the historical struggle of man in his demon-haunted world and yet you still hold on to religious beliefs. Down here where I live, we have a word for that: cooyon.
Yeah, but that is not the discussion.
Again, the question was atheism not whether biologists belong to the Christian or Protestant church. You do not need to be religious in order to believe in a god. There are so many different religions, that does not mean that there are that many gods. This is about the basic belief that there is something else.
For information: The Society of Ordained Scientists is a dispersed ecumenical preaching order of priest-scientists, we have non-ordained members as associates. For the purposes of defining membership (both full and associate) the designation "scientists" refers to those having a qualification and/or experience at a professional level of science or technology. Of our 86 full members 8 are biologists, 4 biochemists and 7 in medical research. The other disciplines include mathematics, physics, astrophysics, engineering, chemists, pharmacologists and meteorology. We have two John Templeton prizewinners, one biologist (Arthur Peacocke) and one physicist (John Polkinghorne).
Make of that what you will; in my experience the statement: "Among scientists, the percentage of biologists professing themselves to be religious is lower than, say, among physicists and mathematicians" is probably true, with the exception of the medical field.
Separate names with a comma.