New York Times: Religion and Science in Angels and Demons

[bretonlass]

Today, I found a very interesting essay in the New York Times, about the religion-science conflict in the latest cinematic adaptation of Dan Brown's books. It rises some pretty intriguing concepts, and, while it does not strictly speaks of SF/Fantasy besides a passing mention, I think that you'll find it worth the reading.

Wisdom in a Cleric's Garb; Why Not a Lab Coat Too?

Cheers,

Eloise

[Windwalker]

I enjoyed the essay, Eloise, thanks for pointing it out! He's quite right, in my opinion. The difference is always that religion is often more comforting because it (likes to) deal in certainties, whereas science is discomfiting because it's based on constant questioning and revision. When scientists resort to black/white sound bites for any reason, they're accused of arrogance, a problem that their clerical counterparts are only beginning to encounter and then only in secular societies.

[Windwalker]

Some of you may be following the controversy over major "framer" Chris Mooney's latest book, Unscientific American. Its primary thesis is that scientific illiteracy in the US is the scientists' fault. And some of you may be following the rioting over the latest cover of the newly resurrected Realms of Fantasy. This started a larger conversation about women and people of color in SF/F in which Harlan Ellison joined the fray in a manner guaranteed to make him, well... immortal.

Here are two links that "summarize" these events. The entries showcase yet again why humor and satire are dangerous to dictators, control freaks and inflated egos.

Unscientific American: A Brief History of Chris Mooney

RoF and Ellison: Guys I think I wrote RPF (RPF=Real Person Fiction. The other persons in the cartoon are SF writer K. Tempest Bradford, a prominent voice for diversity in SF/F; and Warren Lapine and Doug Cohen, publisher and art director of RoF, respectively)