Comedian Ricky Gervais explained to WSJ readers why belief in God is silly and we should just be nice. As of last count, replies to the article have approached 5,000.
His claim against belief in God? In short, “I believe in science.”
Hey, Ricky, you too?
But I don’t recognize Gervais’ notion of “science,” which he intends as a contrast to “faith”--
“Science seeks the truth. And it does not discriminate. For better or worse it finds things out. Science is humble. It knows what it knows and it knows what it doesn’t know. It bases its conclusions and beliefs on hard evidence -- evidence that is constantly updated and upgraded. It doesn’t get offended when new facts come along.”
What fairy tale story has someone been reading to Ricky Gervais? Has he never heard of The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, where Thomas Kuhn showed that scientists will go to the mat, even to lengths of irrationality, to defend an accustomed viewpoint? Hasn’t someone let Gervais in on the claims to have discovered cold fusion? Or Climategate?
I’m not suggesting that all scientific claims are to be automatically greeted with suspicion, but his pollyannish view of science makes for a weak foundation for his rejection of theism.
Christians are sometimes accused (and sometimes deservedly) for skipping mental engagement with doubters by the simple appeal to “just believe.” Gervais has supplied an equally simplistic appeal to WSJ readers to “just don’t believe.”
No comments:
Post a Comment