Religion vs science 1

January 2, 2004

David Trim (Letters, THES , December 12) suggests that the "terrible consequences" of religious belief decried by Richard Dawkins (Books, THES , November 28) are matched by similar "terrible consequences" of evolutionary science, particularly Nazi eugenics. His conclusion is that these are both minority distortions that need not undermine belief in religion or science itself.

There are two problems with this. In the first place, Nazi eugenics was based on the religious myth of the existence of race found, for example, in Genesis, but that appears to have little basis in (scientific) fact. Second, scientific hypotheses can be subject to rational criticism and refutation. Religion is, by its nature, irrational; the believer who wants to decry religious-based terrorism has no solid base from which to do so.

Peter Allmark
Northern General Hospital, Sheffield

Please login or register to read this article

Register to continue

Get a month's unlimited access to THE content online. Just register and complete your career summary.

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments