1. Can religion and science coexist peacefully?

2. The Scopes Trial in 1925 dealt with whether or not the theory of evolution could be taught in the classroom. http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/scopes.htm http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/scopes/scopes.htm A jury in Tennessee was to decide the fate of John Scopes, a high school biology teacher charged with illegally teaching the theory of evolution. The guilt or innocence of John Scopes, and even the constitutionality of Tennessee's anti-evolution statute, mattered little. The meaning of the trial emerged through its interpretation as a conflict of social and intellectual values.John ScopesTennessee's anti-evolution statute Opening statements pictured the trial as a titanic struggle between good and evil or truth and ignorance. Bryan claimed that "if evolution wins, Christianity goes." Darrow argued, "Scopes isn't on trial; civilization is on trial." The prosecution, Darrow contended, was "opening the doors for a reign of bigotry equal to anything in the Middle Ages." Darrow said that the anti-evolution law made the Bible "the yardstick to measure every man's intellect, to measure every man's intelligence, to measure every man's learning." It was classic Darrow, and the press--mostly sympathetic to the defense--loved it. Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan during the trial. Modernism vs. Fundamentalism

3. Copernicus, Galileo and Bruno challenged the (Biblical) belief that Earth is the center of the universe In the early 17th century, Galileo and Bruno, embraced the Copernican theory that Earth spins on its axis and travels around the sun once every year. As a result, they suffered much personal injury at the hands of the powerful church inquisitors.GalileoBruno Giordano Bruno had the audacity to even go beyond Copernicus, and, dared to suggest, that space was boundless and that the sun was and its planets were but one of any number of similar systems: Why! -- there even might be other inhabited worlds with rational beings equal or possibly superior to ourselves. For such blasphemy, Bruno was tried before the Inquisition, condemned and burned at the stake in 1600. Galileo was brought forward in 1633, and, there, in front of his "betters," he was, under the threat of torture and death, forced to his knees to renounce all belief in Copernican theories, and was thereafter sentenced to imprisonment for the remainder of his days.

4. Links Scopes Trial VideoScopes Trial Video (2+ mins) R ICHARD D AWKINS VIDEO (Y OU T UBE )R ICHARD D AWKINS VIDEO (Y OU T UBE ) (4 MINUTES ) Evolution and Intelligent Design (Part 1, 8 mins) Short Ken Miller on motivation for anti-evolution "science"Short Ken Miller on motivation for anti-evolution "science" (YouTube 3:40 minutes) Intelligent Design 10 minute video

5. Non-Overlapping Magistrata (Gould) Religion Science Rules Rational facts and theories describe (current) physical model of reality. Predictive Experimental falsifiability. Rules Rational facts and theories describe (current) physical model of reality. Predictive Experimental falsifiability. Rules Beliefs and Faith describe religious reality. Revelatory. Addresses deep emotional needs. No falsifiability Rules Beliefs and Faith describe religious reality. Revelatory. Addresses deep emotional needs. No falsifiability

6. Science attacks religion based on science's rules. Religion feels threatened Religion Science Rules Beliefs and Faith describe religious reality. Emotional comfort No falsifiability Rules Beliefs and Faith describe religious reality. Emotional comfort No falsifiability Creationism inconsistent with physical models Rules Rational facts and theories describe (current) physical model of reality. Predictive Experimental falsifiability. Rules Rational facts and theories describe (current) physical model of reality. Predictive Experimental falsifiability.

7. Religion attacks science - ostensibly using rules of science - but really pseudoscience Religion Science Rules Beliefs and Faith describe religious reality. Emotional comfort No falsifiability Rules Beliefs and Faith describe religious reality. Emotional comfort No falsifiability Teach intelligent design alongside evolution! Motivated by belief Rules Rational facts and theories describe (current) physical model of reality. Predictive Experimental falsifiability. Rules Rational facts and theories describe (current) physical model of reality. Predictive Experimental falsifiability.

8. Conflict caused by insistence that there is only one set of rules and one "reality" – that of science! Religion Science Rules Beliefs and Faith describe religious reality. Emotional comfort No falsifiability Rules Beliefs and Faith describe religious reality. Emotional comfort No falsifiability Rules Rational facts and theories describe (current) physical model of reality. Predictive Experimental falsifiability. Rules Rational facts and theories describe (current) physical model of reality. Predictive Experimental falsifiability.

9. Is it possible or desirable for us to apply the rules of science in all areas of our lives? Aesthetics – Art, Music, Dance, Literature, Poetry Personal relations – Hate, love, physical attraction – Morality and ethics (e.g. abortion issues, cloning) Economics Politics Law

10. Irrational Economic Behavior? by Mark G. BrennanMark G. Brennan Examples of irrational economic behavior provide unlimited opportunities for speculation and theorization by economists. For example, why do individuals borrow money from their credit cards at 19% while simultaneously receiving less than 4% on their savings account? Wouldn't it make more sense to pay off the high-rate credit card balance with funds earning a lower rate? Clearly, something deeper than pure economic calculation drives these actions.

11. Templeton Prize for "spirituality" and science.

12. Substitute Politics for Religion when comparing with Science