Over tHe Eoce

April 11, 2007

Cambridge
Professor Reconciles

Science and Religion

REBECCA CARMICHAEL
Co Eprror-In Cymer

Are religion and science truly
at odds with each other? On
March 23, Dr. Denis Alexander
from Cambridge University came
to UNBC to deliver a free lecture
addressing that question. Dr. Alex-
ander is a renowned biochemist
and cancer researcher who has
written books such as “Rebuilding
the Matrix” and “Beyond Belief”
which examine the issues of sci-
ence and faith.

As an atheist, I was personally
initially skeptical about attending
this lecture, since I wasn’t sure
if there was really a point to that
question. However, upon listening
to Dr. Alexander speak it became
clear that this was indeed an im-
portant question to ask.

This is often an emotional
issue for people, with people on
different sides feeling attacked by
the convictions of others. He man-
ages to convey not only that the
religious should- embrace scien-
tific truth without loss of faith, but
also that scientific curiosity often
comes from the same roots as re-
ligious inquiry, and that religion
can be an important component of
science.

The title of this lecture is en-
titled “The Dawkins Delusion”,
addressing a book written by
Richard Dawkins called “The God
Delusion”. Dr. Alexander criticiz-
. es some of the views of Dawkins,
such as his statement that religion
is a mental illness, comparable
to a virus. He also strongly criti-
cizes Dawkins’ “meme theory” of
religion, instead stating that most
people who come to any religious
conclusion do so after much in-
tellectual consideration, rather
than simply having a belief meme
spread to them.

Of course, the whole lecture
wasn’t merely a criticism of a
book most people in the room
hadn’t read. He started off with
the historical context of science,
explaining that most important
early scientists were also strongly
religious, and had no problems
reconciling their findings with
their faith. In addition, about 40%

of modern scientists believe in
some particular god. He identi-
fied different narratives of human
existence, suclvas scientific, ethic-
al, aesthetic and religious. Each of
these levels is complementary to
each other, not in conflict, at least
according to Dr. Alexander.

He ‘identifies many root ques-
tions of scientific’ inquiry to ac-
tually be religious questions,
such as the-curiosity of how the
universe came about and why life
exists, summed up in the question
of “why is there something rather
than nothing?” These are ques-

tions that drive science, as well as -

theology. Of course, just because
they are religious questions does
not necessarily mean they are an-
swered by religion.

He also points to the scientific
quest for grand unifying theories
that explain everything, such as the
theory of relativity and the theory
of evolution. This quest for coher-
ence again comes from the same
mindset as religious thought. As
science uses independent pieces
of data to create theories, so too
do people use pieces of “data”
from our own lives to construct
particular worldviews, religious
or otherwise.

The lecture was very well at-
tended by a variety of students,
faculty and community mem-
bers. Throughout the lecture he
remained very respectful of athe-
ists and other non-theists, even
of Richard Dawkins. He was also
respectful of a variety of religions,
not necessarily advocating Chris-
tianity as the only spiritual path.
In addition to criticizing hard line
atheists such as Dawkins, he was
also extremely critical of young
earth creationists, such as the ones
who attempt to keep evolution out
of American schools.

Above all, he was very con-
vincing of the view that we really
should all just get along without
creating unnecessary conflicts
between people of different view-
points. There need not be any
conflict in being a scientist who
is also religious, or in being a the-
ist who also accepts scientific and
rational thought. This was a very
refreshing perspective, one that is
rare in North America.

“Dr. Alexander criticizes some of the views of Daw-
kins, such as his statement that religion is a mental

illness, comparable to a virus.

\

Temporary

Admission
Suspension Lifted

Resecca CARMICHAEL
Co Eprror In Caer

The university has ended the
temporary suspension of admis-
sions to four academic programs
— Economics, Northern Studies,
Physics and Women’s Studies
— for new students.

The original decision to sus-
pend admission to these programs
was met with much criticism from
students and faculty. Part of this
was due to some misunderstand-
ings and rumors around the topic.
This decision would not have af-
fected students currently enrolled
in those programs, but some aca-
demic advisors have given errone-
ous advice contrary to that.

Other criticism came from
Senate members, since the deci-
sion to suspend admissions had
not gone through the Senate. The
Senate has authority over aca-

“pratense! |
What we offer:

demic programs and is respon-
sible for giving recommendations
on changes to them, as outlined in
the University Act. There is some
controversy about the manner in
which the university has handled
decisions such as these, since Sen-

ate had not been consulted on this

and several other recent academic
decisions. —

The decision to lift the suspen-
sion was announced on March 29.
The issue was originally on the
agenda for discussion at the last
Board of Governors meeting on
March 30 as a result of a Senate
motion to reconsider the suspen-
sion of admission in the context
of the University’s Academic
Visioning Initiative. However,
the admission suspension was re-
voked by the administration, mak-

ing it unnecessary for the Board of.

Governors to consider it.

* Wage ineree programe
* pnd training

aig’ advancement

The suspended admission was
lifted -in part because the Uni-
versity has been making some
progress - in dealing with the
budget issues and creating finan-
cially sustainable plans for the
future. Much work still has to be
done to creatively solve problems
and implement these plans, but

“the future of the university is not

as dire as some rumors seem to
imply. In particular, turning back
on decisions to delete the co-op
program and temporarily suspend
programs shows that the Uni-
versity was willing to work with
student and faculty after atten-
tion and concern was brought to
these issues. This direction seems
to imply that UNBC can work
towards a financially sustainable
future without negatively limiting
the options of students.