Michael Shermer is a nice man

First Michael Shermer wrote a piece called "Religion, evolution can live side by side", in which the atheist argued, in short, that the warfare model for science and religion is less than satisfactory and that, "Believers should embrace science, especially evolutionary theory, for what it has done to reveal the magnificence of the divinity in a depth never dreamed by our ancient ancestors."

Scientist and fellow atheist Jerry A. Coyne didn't like that. He suffers, apparently, from the rather tired (and lazy) atheist syndrome of thinking that religion is only legitimate and true to itself when it is fundamentalist. I know Feuerbach said that God is a projection for religious people, but it seems like these fundie atheists project the religion that reflects their own desires and tendencies. Anyway. Here's what Coyne had to say,

This piece disappointed me, as I’ve long admired Shermer’s writings, and applauded loudly when he went after Bill Maher’s anti-vaccination stance.  But lately he’s been assuming the faitheist mantle more and more often (could it be because of Templeton sponsorship?).

It would be lovely if Shermer would admit that, in the real world, the only kind of religion not at war with science is deism.

Michael Shermer hits back today, gently but firmly. He focuses on the important issue: Not whether religion is true or not, nor whether it is supported by science or not - but how we can actually improve the world we live in through science.

[I]f it is your goal to educate everyone on earth to the power and wonders of science (as it is the Skeptics Society and www.skeptic.com) and to employ science to solve social, political, economic, medical and environmental problems (as it is my personal goal), then we need as many people as we can get on board toward a common goal, whatever it may be (starvation in Africa, disease in India, poverty in South America, global warming everywhere…pick your battle). If you insist that people of faith renounce every last ounce of their beliefs before they are allowed to join the common fight against these scourges of humanity, then you have just alienated the vast majority of the world’s population from your project.To what end? So you can stand up tall and proud and proclaim “…but I never gave an inch to those faith heads!”? Well good for you! Just keep on playing “Nearer my Atheism to Thee” while the ship of humanity slips further into the depths of disaster.

Sometimes religion is the problem, but usually it is something else—local political battles, governmental corruption, lack of education, resource depletion, currency debasement, inflation, poverty, etc. Don’t forget the bigger picture of what we’re trying to accomplish through science and reason: a better life for all humanity. Pick your battles carefully and choose your strategy wisely.

Scientistic atheists dig their own grave when they insist on ramming their rigid ideology down religious throats. Here's a hint: It makes us gag. Some of us are smart enough to see through the bigotry and narrow-mindedness of these atheists and to own science from our own religious perspective. But not everyone is. And they will simply reject science altogether when confronted by the rabidly irreligious and their misunderstanding of science. And what exactly do atheists stand to gain from alienating the religious? Whatever it is, it does not benefit science.

No matter what atheists tell themselves, science is not the property of those with no faith, nor does it in any way necessarily lead to the loss of faith or support the lack of faith. Those of us who love science, whether we are atheist or religious, must fight those who want to co-opt it for ideological reasons, whether they are atheist or religious. And I'm happy to fight alongside such a prominent thinker and all-round nice guy as Michael Shermer. For the sake or science itself, for the sake of the world and its future and for the sake of God.