Scientists Think Spirituality Is Congruent With Scientific Discovery, Religion Is Not

06 May 2011

More than 20 percent of atheist scientists are spiritual, according to new research from Rice University. Though the general public marries spirituality and religion, the study found that spirituality is a separate idea - one that more closely aligns with scientific discovery - for "spiritual atheist" scientists.

The research will be published in the June issue of Sociology of Religion.

Through in-depth interviews with 275 natural and social scientists at elite universities, the Rice researchers found that 72 of the scientists said they have a spirituality that is consistent with science, although they are not formally religious.

"Our results show that scientists hold religion and spirituality as being qualitatively different kinds of constructs," said Elaine Howard Ecklund, assistant professor of sociology at Rice and lead author of the study. "These spiritual atheist scientists are seeking a core sense of truth through spirituality - one that is generated by and consistent with the work they do as scientists."

For example, these scientists see both science and spirituality as "meaning-making without faith" and as an individual quest for meaning that can never be final. According to the research, they find spirituality congruent with science and separate from religion, because of that quest; where spirituality is open to a scientific journey, religion requires buying into an absolute "absence of empirical evidence."

"There's spirituality among even the most secular scientists," Ecklund said. "Spirituality pervades both the religious and atheist thought. It's not an either/or. This challenges the idea that scientists, and other groups we typically deem as secular, are devoid of those big 'Why am I here?' questions. They too have these basic human questions and a desire to find meaning."

Ecklund co-authored the study with Elizabeth Long, professor and chair of the Department of Sociology at Rice. In their analysis of the 275 interviews, they discovered that the terms scientists most used to describe religion included "organized, communal, unified and collective." The set of terms used to describe spirituality include "individual, personal and personally constructed." All of the respondents who used collective or individual terms attributed the collective terms to religion and the individual terms to spirituality.

"While the data indicate that spirituality is mainly an individual pursuit for academic scientists, it is not individualistic in the classic sense of making them more focused on themselves," said Ecklund, director of the Religion and Public Life Program at Rice. "In their sense of things, being spiritual motivates them to provide help for others, and it redirects the ways in which they think about and do their work as scientists."

Ecklund and Long noted that the spiritual scientists saw boundaries between themselves and their nonspiritual colleagues because their spirituality facilitated engagement with the world around them. Such engagement, according to the spiritual scientists, generated a different approach to research and teaching: While nonspiritual colleagues might focus on their own research at the expense of student interaction, spiritual scientists' sense of spiritualty provides nonnegotiable reasons for making sure that they help struggling students succeed.

Source:
David Ruth
Rice University
Article URL: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/224442.php

---

"The voice of the majority is no proof of justice." - Schiller

I'm curious Wercozy. How would you define your spirituality?

---

Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself. Leo Tolstoy

There is also a difference between Christianity and religion, as Christ Himself pointed out.

---

Job 33:15 "In a dream, in a vision of the night, When deep sleep falls upon men, In slumberings upon the bed;" Theology 101 "If He doesn't know everything then He isn't God."

Maori culture, spirituality, tradition and religion are promoted in New Zealand to the extreme that political parties are specially formed to drive the Maori agenda, in some cases aggressively.

Recently a caterer at a wedding asked a Maori employee who was serving food to cover her arm which had a large Maori tattoo called a moko on it. The employee has complained to the Race Relations Conciliator and the employer is now required to attend a hearing. If found guilty of discrimination he will be ordered to pay compensation.

Another similar case is described here

Public Maori ceremonies regularly take place here as part of their spiritual belief system. A roading project can be stalled while the Maori elders decide what to do about some local "taniwha" or spirit that may take offence at being disturbed. Some of the issues seem absurd and trivial to non-Maori but Maori are determined to be a strong voice and they often protest in dramatic fashion.

I believe our government is doing its best to placate Maori and other ethnic groups, allowing them special buildings and rights to practice at schools but ironically attempts to revive Christian based spirituality in schools are being opposed by the secular-humanist lobby. Too bad about the resulting crime rate then.

---

Job 33:15 "In a dream, in a vision of the night, When deep sleep falls upon men, In slumberings upon the bed;" Theology 101 "If He doesn't know everything then He isn't God."

Yes, He did - at the wedding in Cana - and He was a bit tipsy.

---

Brain-washing starts in the cradle. - Arthur Koestler

This sounds a lot like sophistry.

Christianity is different from religion in the same way that 'cat is different from mammal' or 'peach is different from fruit'.

---

Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself. Leo Tolstoy

[/color]
Christians can and do practice religion, but the Gospel invites us to follow a better Way than the religious way, that Way is Christ Himself. You have to know Him personally to appreciate the difference.

And Yes, Christ was "filled with the Spirit", but not just at Cana.

Quote:

Luke 4:1 KJV And Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness,

[/quote]

You're changing the definition of religion. Look it up. I'm not trying to be a 'hard @ss, but it is what it is. Christianity is a religion, by the definition of the word. You can't call a cow a cat just because it has four legs. Don't ruin all you have going for you by trying to defend the indefensible.

---

Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself. Leo Tolstoy

intelfam said
On the other side, I am not sure I agree that scientists always "...... will not hang on to them in the face of contradictory data". Plenty of examples of those who do just that against the face of mainstream thinking; and the mainstream will describe that as "faith". And sometimes, just sometimes, the nonconformist turns out to be right. I feel that their doing so (and being vindicated) is sometimes the reasoning behind religions arguing for faith as always a valid attitude to difficult topics?[/quote]


I suppose it depends on just how much your pet theory has been knocked about by experimental results. There is a minority group still trying to find a 'hidden variable' theory of Quantum Mechanics. I'm not sure what would finally convince them. Fred Hoyle's steady state theory (or continuous creation) is an example of an extreme minority group but you cannot reject it in the same way that you can perpetual motion machines for example. A bit of eccentricity adds a light touch though.

---

"Millions long for immortality who don't know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon" Suzanne Ertz

intelfam wrote

I'm not sure what his views were late in life. There has been plenty of evidence supporting big bang vs steady state (cosmic background microwave radiation in particular) emerging in his lifetime. I seem to remember Stephen Hawking writing somewhere on how he had inadvertently given Hoyle a put down in a lecture ("I've done the equations") Hopefully he will be remembered for his contribution to stellar development-how Carbon is produced in particular.

---

"Millions long for immortality who don't know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon" Suzanne Ertz

You may call it a sophistry if you like; however, there is a distinct, and significant difference between those who live according to the original requirements of discipleship, and those who belong to a religion, sufficient enough for those who follow such to legitimately use a different word to describe themselves. Christianity in general is still a religion, but my point is that the further distinction is informative enough to require another word, and that the distinction be made in the interest of accurate communication.

---

I'd like to see the original research, while I would completely agree with some of this conclusion, I would need to see direct support for the underlined portion. Another problem is that by sampling only academicians it is illegitimate to generalize to all scientists. Sociologists are known for not practicing sufficient rigor at times, although it must be acknowledged that, the higher the level of observation of the natural world, the more difficult and slippery rigor becomes.
Something I find a bit odd about this whole thing though, is that of the scientists I have known, whom I would say had the type of spirituality I have in mind, they resolutely practice high degrees of rigor.
As I think about this more though I begin to suspect that what I mean by spirituality within someone of a natural science interpretation of reality, and what the author does may not be much the same. Well Intelfam, this is an interesting topic, I've wondered for some time about the concept of atheistic spirituality, if you ever find out how they defined the term, please let me know.

---

I am not sure I can access the original research Epi, just thought it might start a discussion of the type you and Truthseeker are engaged in as I find it very informative.

Could you clarify "Something I find a bit odd about this whole thing though, is that of the scientists I have known, whom I would say had the type of spirituality I have in mind, they resolutely practice high degrees of rigor."
Perhaps I missed something. How do you mean, odd? Are they in hard sciences or are you saying they're rigorous sui generis? Or are the authors meaning "ethical" rather than spiritual, I wonder. Strong ethical behaviour would seem to be the result of strong values.

---

"The voice of the majority is no proof of justice." - Schiller

Proofread proofread proofread!!! I decided while writing, that I may have been a bit harsh and mis-edited out some of what I said as I struggled to figure out exactly what I was trying to say, and say it nicer. I tend to be somewhat of a zealot when it comes to rigor, and ought to be more careful lest I be the pot calling the kettle black. The part in green replaced the part in blue.
(I hope I did this right I've got to run to work without a careful proofread)

---

The purpose of religion is not to test the boundaries of scientific knowledge, that is a given surely. True religion must however be in harmony with true science… we can leave aside pseudo-science and the seven twenty four day creationists.

It remains a fact however that some of the greatest advances in human endeavour… for what is science but knowledge… have been made by folk who were and are religious and spiritual in the accepted term and not in the extrapolated terminology of the atheist who wants his cake and also to eat it. Being religious is no drawback to learning and discovery and to suggest otherwise is, I think, to be paranoid. In the fields of medicine, cosmology, biology etc. etc. religiosity has never, among honest folk, been a drawback. Yes among those who used religion for selfish gain it did so and will continue to do so… just as honest advancement will be hindered among those who have an anti-religious agenda and pursue advancement in their chosen field with blinkers on.

Discovery and scientific advancement is not hindered by true spirituality, and by that I mean the spirituality of the theist. Whether one is claiming to be spiritual of a secular type, or of a religious type, should not be the deciding factor. At the core should be honesty.

Some of the greatest minds are and were those who say they are atheist but more or even at least as many were spiritual religious folk.


The director of the Human Genome Project Francis.S.Collins was so amazed at what he discovered that he turned from being an avowed atheist to a theist. I have read his book 'The Language of God.'


I did not agree with all he said since he is still trying to fit evolution as God's way of developing life, after giving it a kick start, into his beliefs but he makes powerful arguments in favour of God's existence.

http://articles.cnn.com/2007-04-03/us/collins.commentary_1_god-dna-revelation?_s=PM:US

There seems to be a relentless attack on the part of leading atheists on religiously minded folk. What is it driven by... fear?

---

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle