Francis Collins. Ugh.
Posted on February 23, 2010 | 29 Comments
Oh, ugh. Francis Collins has edited a new collection of essays on religious belief and its relationship to reason. Before I get to that, some background:
Last summer, when Collins was appointed as the new Director of the National Institutes of Health, many people, myself included, were understandably very concerned, as he is an evangelical Christian who has clearly demonstrated that he has no problem mixing science and faith, and even created The BioLogos Foundation, to (according to its site):
address the escalating culture war between science and faith in the United States. On one end of the spectrum, “new atheists” argue that science removes the need for God. On the other end, religious fundamentalists argue that the Bible requires us to reject many of the conclusions of modern science. Many people — including scientists and believers in God — do not find these extreme options attractive.
BioLogos represents the harmony of science and faith. It addresses the central themes of science and religion and emphasizes the compatibility of Christian faith with scientific discoveries about the origins of the universe and life.
…or, in other words: hey, if you have no problem engaging in a great deal of cognitive dissonance and compartmentalization, and if you only accept the scientific facts that don’t challenge your faith, and if you want to be told that your beliefs are both rational and reasonable, come join us!
Pretending that faith is rational and that one can cherry-pick science so that it fits with their beliefs is one thing; it’s far worse, though, for a supposedly scientific foundation to publicly advocate unscientific beliefs and ideas.
And therein lies the problem with Collins. Yes, I find it hilarious that he found Jesus in a waterfall, and I’m extremely confused as to how he can possibly manage to be both a scientist and an evangelical Christian, but, whatever, his private religious beliefs, would, in most other circumstances, be of no concern. However, his decision to actively encourage the combination of religious faith and science certainly does make them a concern.
Collins became the Director of NIH in October. I had hoped that, once he became a government official, he’d have the good sense and the honesty to disassociate himself with this BioLogos-y nonsense. And he did resign as president of BioLogos. However, he has edited and written the introduction for a new book, Belief: Readings on the Reasons for Faith, which, according to its its press release, is:
[A] provocative collection of essays which reinforce the longstanding intellectual tradition on the side of faith.
that
proves once and for all, despite the doubts of a cynical world, the rationality of faith.
!!!!!
Proves? Proves?
Absolutely ridiculous, but that’s not the problem here. The problem is that, despite having become the head of a governmental scientific institution, he’s still actively promoting irrationality and advocating profoundly unscientific ideas, such as (from his introduction to the new book):
If God has any real significance, God must be at least in part outside of nature [...] Science, including the science of evolution, is limited to exploring and understanding the natural world. Therefore, to apply scientific arguments to the questions of God’s existence, as if this were somehow a showstopper, is committing a category error. If God Almighty, unlimited by space or time, chose the mechanism of evolution to carry out a creative plan that led to a truly marvelous diversity of living things on a blue planet near the outer edge of a spiral galaxy, we would have to admit that this was a powerful and highly effective plan.
and
And then there was the Big Bang. From observations about the red shift of retreating galaxies in the far-flung universe, and the measurement of background microwave radiation that reflects an echo of a massive explosion 13.7 billion years ago, it is clear that our universe had a beginning, in an unimaginable cosmological singularity. The laws of physics break down there. If the universe had a beginning, how was it created? Nature has not been observed to create itself. To postulate a creator that is also part of nature provides no solution, Instead, one seems obligated to yield to the logic of the cosmological argument that there was a First Cause, a supernatural Creator outside of the laws of nature, and outside of time and space.
I know that it sounds harsh, but Collins really is abusing his authority here. His background and his current position grant him a certain level of credibility, influence, and power, and he’s using that power to promote profoundly anti-scientific claims.
Ugh.
Comments
29 Responses to “Francis Collins. Ugh.”
February 23rd, 2010 @ 6:32 pm
I have reservations about the idea, but I imagine that it's kinda like how you have to deal with judges. Everyone has biases, but it is their ability to overlook those biases in order to decide things properly that you have to look at. By using this type of reasoning, atheists couldn't be judges, since if a case came before them that involved a religious organization, they may be biased against their beliefs. Atheists could not be biblical historians, since they would be biased to believe that everything in the bible is in error.
It is obvious that we can't all be unbiased in areas where we may need to be, but overcoming that bias in order to do the job right is something that is necessary to be done in many lines of work, and I see no evidence that Collins has allowed his theology to interfere with his work in biology.
February 23rd, 2010 @ 6:37 pm
Francis Collins: proof that extraordinarily intelligent people can often hold extraordinarily kooky views. Yeah, I still think he was a good NIH pick. But he is like the accomplished uncle in the family who sometimes blurts out embarrassing statements.
Hey, even Issac Newton attempted to practice alchemy.
February 24th, 2010 @ 11:42 am
Umm. . . he's using his position to tell people that science proves the existence of Ceiling Cat and Jeebus. It may not be interfering with his own job, but is sure is misleading people about what science does and does not say.
February 24th, 2010 @ 12:18 pm
I appreciate the way the Israeli press dealt with with the theocratic nonsense chief science advisor Gavriel Avital spouted and went after his resignation for doing what Jerry rightly points out is the same thing Francis is doing: blurring the line between theology and science. Nowhere is there scientific evidence for the existence of the christian god, and by implying that there actually is when there is not, Francis has crossed the very line his public position as chief scientist demands he does not cross.
February 24th, 2010 @ 4:18 pm
But I didn't say that he has let his theism interfere with his work (yet), just that “His background and his current position grant him a certain level of credibility, influence, and power, and he’s using that power to promote profoundly anti-scientific claims.”
And, like Jerry said, Collins is pretending that his Waterfall Jebus is proven by science, and that's extremely dishonest for anyone to claim, let alone someone in Collins's position.
February 24th, 2010 @ 4:23 pm
OH HAI! TEH NEXT MORNIN, IN DA DEWY GRAS IN DA SHADOW OV TEH
CASCADEZ, I FELL ON MAH KNEEZ (SRSLY!) AN ACCEPTD DIS TRUTH — DAT
CEILIN CAT IZ CEILIN CAT, DAT WATERFALL JEBUS IZ HIS SON, AN DAT I'M
GIVIN MAH LIFE 2 DAT BELIEF SO I CAN HAZ CHEESBURGERZ.
kthxbai
February 24th, 2010 @ 4:26 pm
The level of intellectual compartmentalization (I think that's the right phrase)/cognitive dissonance that it would require to be both a scientist and an evangelical Waterfall Jesus lover must take a TON of energy. I get tired just thinking about it.
February 24th, 2010 @ 4:30 pm
Exactly! Very well put. BioLogos is ridiculous, as is Collins's Waterfall Jebus nonsense, but, before he became a government official, I didn't find it nearly as worrisome/irresponsible as I do now. This really does seem to me to be an misuse/abuse of his authority, at the very least.
February 24th, 2010 @ 4:45 pm
I was going to post exactly that! Except I was gonna say he's like the old uncle who comes to Thanksgiving dinner, is perfectly rational and cordial, but then suddenly blurts out, “I wet myself!” or “the pie might be poisoned!”
February 24th, 2010 @ 7:35 pm
Or “hey kids, did you just see Jesus in that bowl of gravy? Uncle Francis sure did!”
February 24th, 2010 @ 11:09 pm
I think if he were held up to the standards of a high school science teacher he wouldn't get away with the muddiness alone of his thinking. Somehow it strikes me as more sad than aggressive though. Like all those gay senators, gov.s etc. Like being good at math he needs to be all Jebussy to justify his braininess. Until faith-healing is the only treatment covered by my part-d I'm just going to be saddened. How scary that that doesn't seem far off.
February 25th, 2010 @ 5:30 am
It's not even that Collins is a purveyor of religious claptrap whilst, at the same time, he is a serious scientist, it's his 'reasons' for becoming religious that make me cringe. They are all such ludicrous reasons. Firstly, he spoke to an elderly woman in a hospital who was in seeing distance of the finishing line but who wasn't in any way miffed about it because she was deluded into thinking that she was going to meet Jesus and was quite chipper about it. In other words, he met a slightly dotty old woman who said she knows what happens to you when you die – and he believed her! Secondly, he read the execrable twaddle of CS Lewis's Mere Christianity (merely christ inanity, more like) and was convinced by page 3 on the basis of Lewis's ridiculously, and demonstrably, false explication of the so-called 'moral law. Thirdly, having said that he studied the world's main religions and couldn't understand them (what's not to understand, FFS!) so that he had to speak to a Christian minister (why not an Imam?) for guidance, he claims that the final piece of his religious quest jig-saw fell into place when he encountered a frozen waterfall that, because it was 3 stranded, reminded him of the Trinity – that is, it reminded him of the one claim of ridiculous religious dogma that is the most INCOMPREHENSIBLE OF ALL.
What a loon.
February 25th, 2010 @ 12:26 pm
I've never believed this man to be anything other than irrational and “wrong”. But sadly, there are still scientists who cling to some form of religion. If I met a professional scientists who said he was christian, I'd have to ask him how he achieves this amazing fete? How does god play any part in the universe and also allow science to find processes and laws that require no god at all?
How can any scientist answer such questions? I suppose they could just give up their theism. But if they won't, what would be the best answer? I suspect that Francis' form of answer is pretty much as good as a scientist can give. So I guess I have some sympathy for the guy. Maybe even pity.
I suppose I should demand that he drops all irrationality, but I'm not sure I've dropped all mine yet, and I'm quite sure atheist Bill Maher (vaccination-loon) hasn't got rid of all of his irrationality either.
After that, I should demand he STFU. But he's going to be constantly prodded by people like me (and people better able to prod him) to explain how he juggles these ideas in his head. So he writes a book, puts his case and makes a bit of money along the way. Not only does it encourage other religious lunacy, but the other side-effect is that you can try to tempt the more fundamental believers away from their history-science-denial.
There's no excusing the guy. But he's here. People are going to believe in shit for a while longer. What argument for his beliefs would you prefer to hear?
February 27th, 2010 @ 8:19 pm
Very scary indeed. And, yes, there is something rather sad about it all. And then there's WATERFALL JEBUS! :)
February 27th, 2010 @ 8:22 pm
Definitely. The “reasons” are, like you say, completely ludicrous and ridiculous, especially when laid out together like that.
I really hope someone makes a t.v. movie called “Francis Collins: The Waterfall Jebus Years” so that we can see a dramatic reenactment of the three-stranded waterfall, the old lady, him sitting around reading C.S. Lewis, etc. Ha, good times!
March 1st, 2010 @ 1:01 pm
Because you said you read French I will comment in French. By the way there is not word in English or in French to express HOW stupid you are!
Vous vous moquez de Collins parce qu'il a vu Dieu dans une chute d'eau. Mais l'expérience de “awe and wonder” est une expérience fondamentale de l'etre humain. La beauté est pour les croyants un signe de l'existence de Dieu. Jane Goodal a meme décrit des chimpanzés en “méditation” devant une … chute d'eau!!
Visiblement vous etes moins évoluée qu'eux!
Mais surtout la ou vous etes stupide c'est que vous ne voyez pas que Collins est votre allié car il essaie de montrer qu'on peut etre Darwinien et Chrétien ( ce qui est absurde mais passons..) Son travail apporte donc des soutiens supplémentaires au darwinisme.
Franchement je ne croyais pas que des athées aussi obtus que vous existiez aux USA! Je pensais que c'était une spécialité française (salut Antoine!).
March 1st, 2010 @ 1:11 pm
Yes, I can read your comment perfectly well. And, wow, well-done on insulting me in both English and French.
March 1st, 2010 @ 1:23 pm
This is the one thing you must know: You get three expression marks, use them well.
March 1st, 2010 @ 3:48 pm
When you have nothing substantive to offer, you! must! use! many!, many! exclamation! points!
March 2nd, 2010 @ 3:21 pm
Yes, that amazes me, too. I suppose that they be engaging in constant subconscious rationalization/compartmentalization/suppression of doubt. I'm not sure. It's befuddling.
I don't know that there's any argument for his beliefs that I'd like to hear, but I would prefer it if he would, at the least, not openly advocate his anti-scientific religious beliefs while he's a public official.
September 10th, 2010 @ 8:50 pm