Still others who recognize that this sense exists are awed by the natural alone. Thus, Richard Dawkins
writes:
What I see in Nature is a magnificent structure that we can comprehend only very imperfectly, and
that must fill a thinking person with a feeling of humility. This is a genuinely religious feeling that has
nothing to do with mysticism.RESEARCH QUESTIONS
• What explanations do nontheists provide for the feeling most people have that there is more to life than
this world?
• What explanations do Christian traditions provide for the sense that there is more to this life than this
life?
• According to evolutionary theories, what role would such a feeling serve?
• According to Christian theories, what role does this feeling serve?
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
• Why are many people depressed by the thought that there is nothing more than this life?
• Are Christian explanations plausible for the feeling that reality encompasses more than this world? Are
nontheistic explanations plausible? Which seems more plausible?
- SCIENCE AND CHRISTIANITY IN CONFLICT
In his letters, Greg makes it clear that he sees no compatibility, in any traditional sense of the term,
between a naturalistic worldview and Christianity (see pages 52-60). Indeed, the only religion he accepts
as valid is one that "remains mute on the most meaningful matters of human experience, such as belief in
gods, life after death, spirits, or souls." For Greg, a theological approach to these concepts is
contradictory to a naturalistic worldview, partly because theological claims- i.e., "God loves people"-
cannot be falsified using the scientific method.
The claims of Christianity provoke hostility from some scientists:Generally the state of mind of a believer in a revelation is the awful arrogance of saying, "I know,
and those who do not agree with my belief are wrong." In no other field is such arrogance so
widespread, in no other field do people feel so utterly certain of their "knowledge." It is to me quite
disgusting that anybody should feel so superior, so selected and chosen against all the many who
differ in their beliefs or unbeliefs.This is not, however, the case among all scientists and evolutionists. Much "religious belief does not
represent a form of mental weakness but rather the healthy functioning of the biologically and culturally
well-adapted human mind," says David Sloan Wilson. And Harvard University zoologist Stephen Jay
Gould writes:
I do not see how science and religion could be unified, or even synthesized . . . but I also do not