What was Francis Collins "thinking"

RPM got me thinking about two things today. First, what's up with the new picture. Second, Francis Collins' is repeating his experiences with religion. Four points

  • The equanimity of his religous patients in the face of cruel fate fascinated him
  • He was struck by the arguments in C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity (i.e., "Christians can make rational arguments!").
  • An epiphany as he was hiking through the Cascade mountains.

This is an area where you have to be careful to distinguish between the reasons people sincerely believe they believe in x, and the real causes at work here. Psychologists have long known that people can be primed toward particular preferences through manipulating environmental inputs, but when asked why they made the choices they made most humans can sincerely offer you a complex and plausible sounding rationale. I believe that religious belief at any moment in time is shaped by a large number of factors. But, many people will claim that one particular "reason" is the root of their belief, whether it be reading the Bible, the Cosmological Argument or a personal "experience" with the divine. I do not doubt the sincerity of these assertions, the problem with examining these beliefs about religion though is importance that individuals will ascribe to their assertions. This was, I believe, the issue that John Derbyshire was getting at in his review of Ramesh Ponnuru's new book when he stated "It would be an astounding thing, just from a statistical point of view, if, after conducting a rigorous open-ended inquiry from philosophical first principles, our author came to conclusions precisely congruent with the dogmas of the church in which he himself is a communicant."

More like this

It is no secret that John Derbyshire is a friend of mine. I am sure most SB readers would find such a connection abhorrent, nevertheless, any man who picks up Mark Ridley's Evolution at my recommendation is a friend :) The goddess of evolution should not just be admired and given due respect, one…
Larry Moran has an excellent review of Francis Collins' silly book The Language of God. You don't really appreciate Ken Miller until you have contemplated the far daffier arguments made by Collins. Moran writes: The second persuasive argument is the presence in all of us of a God-shaped vacuum.…
If I see Francis Collins' pious, simpering facade one more time, I'm going to get really pissed off. Can someone please give that man a Templeton Prize and let him retire to the Cascades, where he can stare at waterfalls to his heart's content? CNN has an article on "Why this scientist believes in…
Francis Collins is a very smart, very disciplined, very hardworking man. He was the head of the Human Genome Project, and now he has written a book, The Language of God : A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief(amzn/b&n/abe/pwll), and I have to tell you, it doesn't look promising. He talks…

Why are some humans inclined toward x & not y, or the converse, or none?
Why do some people hold, say, x dear when it so clearly conflicts w/ rigid conviction y? Cognitive dissonance? Idiocy?

socio-cultural+innate propensities?

By Rietzsche Boknecht (not verified) on 15 Jun 2006 #permalink

Razib:

A question which I don't doubt that you have mulled over before: Claims of the sort you make about religious belief can be equally applied to scientific beliefs. How do you draw a (principled) distinction between the two cases?

Regards,
Kumar

see here re: history. in terms of cognition, yes, i do believe that beliefs about science, and even of scientists, are not all that different. the main difference is that science is more explicit and formal in structure and reality tends to bound it more tightly.