Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

I Think We All Know

September 28, 2006
Intelligent Design
Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Dawkins says

Given that 93% of the National Academy does not believe in any kind of personal god, a statistician would expect that at least some members of Congress, if not a majority, would also be atheists. Yet, as far as I can discover, the number of avowed atheists among the 535 members of Congress is not 93%, not even 10%. It seems to be zero. What is going on here? I think we all know.

Yeah, I think we all DO know, Richard. The National Academy membership is a self-elected body where your chances of becoming a member if you’re not an avowed atheist is akin to passing a camel through the eye of a needle. The National Academy is a self-elected body out-of-touch with mainstream America. Congress, on the other hand, is neither self-elected nor (arguably) out-of-touch.

Comments
However, it is worth noting that scientists do not normally know much about the religious beliefs of their colleagues. Offhand, I doubt if I could state the religious preferences of more than a couple of the many scientists that I know. Those such as Dawkins and Miller who write about their religious beliefs are very much in the minority. So when scientists are nominated for membership in the National Academy, their election is based upon their published scientific achievements, not their religious beliefs. So indeed, if a large majority of National Academy members do not believe in a personal god, it certainly suggests that such a belief may be an impediment to scientific achievement (or conversely, that the sort of people who believe in a personal god are less likely to make important scientific discoveries).trrll
September 28, 2006
September
09
Sep
28
28
2006
09:41 AM
9
09
41
AM
PDT
3% of Americans are atheists. If we're playing the accurate representation game, then there should be 3 atheist Senators and 13 atheist Representatives. So far as I know, there aren't any -- at least none who will admit it.Carl Sachs
September 28, 2006
September
09
Sep
28
28
2006
09:35 AM
9
09
35
AM
PDT
Dave, Yeah, what Linda said. Why don't you be a little fair-minded and treat Dawkins like Dawkins treats Creationists?Douglas
September 28, 2006
September
09
Sep
28
28
2006
09:05 AM
9
09
05
AM
PDT
DaveScot -- give the Dawkins-bashing thing a rest, you are starting to look ridiculous! And to the quote -- Dawkins has one interpretation and you have another, that's all there is to it.Linda Slater
September 28, 2006
September
09
Sep
28
28
2006
08:41 AM
8
08
41
AM
PDT
DaveScot, am I right if I suspect you aren't a truly devout fan of Richard dawkins? . pwePoul Willy Eriksen
September 28, 2006
September
09
Sep
28
28
2006
08:26 AM
8
08
26
AM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply