We Need Each Other — But the Chasm is Wide

 

Global issues like deforestation, climate change and poverty cut across secular and religious lines and are providing an opportunity for religious and environmental communities to work together. The seriousness of threat of climate change has elucidated the valuable role that religious faiths can play in promoting environmental conservation (for instance, see the National Religious Partnership for the Environment). Religious groups have considerable heft to bring to environmental efforts through their capacity to shape worldviews, moral authority, large base of adherents, financial resources and community-building capacity. Given the critical issues facing conservation today and the uncertain future support we will have to address them, forming alliances with receptive faith-based groups seems prudent.

 

But such alliances require care to establish and cultivate. Science-based organizations that want to develop new partnerships with religious groups need to create dialogue with those groups based on awareness and respect for potentially different worldviews; these partnerships also require an acknowledgement of the tensions between science and religion. At The Nature Conservancy, we know we need to do a better job of describing how our work benefits people. But we also need to do a better job of making science more relevant and accessible to the American public — 84 percent of which have a religious affiliation (Pew 2008).

 

This challenge is magnified by the differences between many scientists and that public. A recent survey of 1,700 scientists from 21 elite research institutions in the United States explored their views on religion, spirituality and ethics (Ecklund 2011). The survey included both natural and social scientists; it identified striking differences between the views of these scientists on religion and belief in God and those of the U.S. population. About 53 percent of the scientists surveyed identified no religious affiliation, compared to 16 percent of the general population.

 

 

 

It is worth noting that the universities included in the survey (Ecklund 2011) are predominantly in the Northeast or West Coast and do not include historically more religious parts of the United States (e.g., the South and Central states; PEW 2008). Do these findings mean that scientists at our elite universities (and perhaps more broadly) are a godless bunch — or even if so, that they can’t communicate with believers? Certainly not. But they do mean that the task of communication is more difficult than simply explaining what we as scientists do.

 

There are major differences in worldview between the majority of Americans and more than 50 percent of this country’s scientists, many of whom are educating the next generation of scientists. This lack of religious tradition among scientists has led to (a) a lack of ongoing interaction between these scientists and religious individuals and communities, and (b) a lack of cultural context for understanding the differences in their worldview, a gap that hampers dialogue. To further exacerbate this problem, many scientists are reluctant to discuss religion or how faith does or does not play a role in their professional lives. Finally, scientists have also been criticized for mainly talking to each other about issues of public science, leaving them with little familiarity with members of the public and little ability to relate to those outside their own social circles, particularly when dealing with religion and science (Ecklund 2011).

 

Why This Dialogue Matters — to Science and Conservation

 

The consequences of this gap between scientists and many in the public are potentially catastrophic — for science and science-based organizations. A recent survey conducted by the National Science Foundation (2010) found that, while Americans overall express strong support for science, most are not well informed (e.g., less than half of Americans accept the theory of evolution; only 44 percent feel that environmental scientists understand the causes of global warming). Further, over one-half of the respondents in a similar study conducted in 2006 (NSF 2006) agreed that “we spend too much on science and not enough on faith,” and that “scientific research these days doesn’t pay enough attention to the moral values of society.” Attitudes toward environmental protection have also declined dramatically in recent years: In 2000, 69 percent of Americans viewed environmental protection as more important than economic growth, a figure that had declined to 47 percent by 2003 and 42 percent by 2009 (NSF 2010). The study also identified television as the main source of scientific information, followed by the Internet.

 

Our task as scientists is clear: To better engage the broader American public with science, we need to be more introspective about our own relationships to religion and how we talk to the public about the connections (or lack thereof) between religion and science (Ecklund 2011). We also need to better understand the attitudes toward science held by the general public and to use media that speaks to the public (TV and the Internet). Therefore, my Big Idea project as part of the Science Impact Project will aim to help bridge this divide by encouraging both TNC scientists and faith communities to share with each other in open forums their experiences struggling with and perhaps reconciling science and religion.

 

I will begin by conducting a survey to explore the religious diversity and personal experiences with faith and science among TNC scientists and perhaps TNC more broadly. I am hoping to develop a series of short documentary videos highlighting TNC scientists and a discussion of the connection between their faith and their work. I would also like to reach out to religious leaders within my own community in Austin, Texas, and include in these videos their stories of the intersection between religion and science in their lives. We plan to set up a series of “showings” at various places around town including churches, community groups and nature centers. The events would be used to share personal accounts of how faith and science interact. Ideally, we would have a local religious leader and local scientists attend each of these events and they would facilitate a joint Q&A after each showing.

 

My goal is that this effort will support TNC’s efforts to reach new audiences in the religious community. It will also help us to better understand different perspectives and worldviews of those in our communities which will make our fundraising, policy efforts and scientific outreach more relevant. Finally, it will help to explore new ways to bring the scientific and religious communities into an open dialogue — to discuss the tensions between science and religion and begin to resolve these tensions. 

 

What do you think? Please send your comments and questions to Lizzie Mcleod and Bob Lalasz, editor of Science Chronicles.

 

---

Image: Quantitative analysis of culture using percentage of books digitized by Google for the categories “science” (in blue) and “religion (in red). Image credit: dullhunk/Flickr. 

Editor’s Note: Each month, “The Big Idea” will spotlight the animating idea of a participant in the Conservancy’s Science Impact Project. Feedback is welcome.