Science, Religion Held To Need Interpretation

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30420, 20 April 1964, Page 9

Science, Religion Held To Need Interpretation

Science could not be said to disprove the existence of God because science, no matter how exciting, did not prove anything: it only recorded and described what people had seen, Professor C. A. Coulson,. Rouse Ball professor of mathematics at Oxford University, told a meeting of Canterbury University students. Science always contained a provisional element, he said. Religious beliefs were described as. fantasies beside the brute facts of science, but both were made up of facts and interpretation, Professor Coulson said. Scientific facts by themselves were dull and boring, and had little value until they were interpreted by men. This involved imagination and “dreaming” to get from specific instances to general scientific laws. No set of books had been studied more scientifically than the books of- the New Testament, and if one was intellectually honest, one had

to admit that the accounts they contained had been shown to be true. Thus, religion, like science, had its facts, but they were historic facts. The interpretation of the facts was seen in the vocabulary of religion, which spoke of such matters as sin, forgiveness and the new life, Professor Coulson said. “Was This Enough?” It was said that the world had outgrown religion because science now did practically everything. Was this enough? asked Professor Coulson. Science could give the facts, and tell man what was possible, but it could not tell man what he ought to do. “Ought” was a word which did not belong to science.

■ln a world that was facing problems such as hunger, and teasing questions, such as the worth of nuclear tests and the place of artificial insemination, the scientist could say what was possible, but not what should be done. There was a great need for insights of sensitivity, imagination, and the ability to put oneself in another person’s shoes—in the Christian’s language, to help them, Professor Coulson said. Einstein once said that science without religion was blind, and religion without science was lame, Professor Coulson said. Science was a tool which was to be used in solving the problems of the world, so that the. dignity of the human person, a child of God as he saw it, could be shown not only in theory but in fact. Professor Coulson also said that there was little evidence to show that being a distinguished scientist inhibited a person from being a Christian. He said that the number of professional scientists who were Christian was surprisingly high. In three departments in different universities he had worked in more than half the professors, readers and other staff were Christians. In England as a whole the Christians numbered one in 10.

Fellows of the Royal Society were recently asked In a questionnaire whether they believed in God and 70 per cent had replied “yes,” he said.