Eminent scientists reject the supernatural: a survey of the Fellows of the Royal Society

Stirrat, Michael; Cornwell, R. Elisabeth

doi:10.1186/1936-6434-6-33

Cited by 14 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are few if any studies comparing views of religion and evolution among biologists, chemists, and physicists. Though Stirrat and Cornwell () found that eminent biologists tend to be less religious than physicists, here we found an unpronounced difference in religiosity (Figure ) when comparing physicists and biologists of the same academic degree level. Furthermore, it is interesting that in our study, we found that physicists actually supported slightly more a Darwinian view of the evolutionary process than did biologists (Figure ), although this difference is not significant.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 61%

“…University scientists at the UACh are more secular than the rest of Chilean society, which is a pattern also seen in other countries (Leuba ; Leuba and Kantor ; Larson and Witham , ; Gross and Simmons ; Stirrat and Cornwell ). Academic affiliation and experience have an important effect on religious disbelief and acceptance of evolution by academic scientists and science students at the UACh.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

“…; Kampourakis and Zogza ; Gregory and Ellis ; Kim and Nehm ; Pazza, Penteado, and Kavalco ; Dias, Willemart, and Marques ; Penteado, Kavalco, and Pazza ). Stirrat and Cornwell () have shown that among members of the Royal Society of London, biologists are more likely to be atheists/agnostics compared to physicists, who are more likely to have a religious affiliation. Despite the many studies conducted on this topic, not much is known about how religiosity and acceptance of evolution vary among people with different academic backgrounds, nor is it well documented how involvement with different scientific areas might influence religious beliefs and acceptance of evolution.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effect of Academic Degree and Discipline on Religious Beliefs and Evolution Acceptance: Survey at a Chilean University

Marín¹,

D’Elı́a²

2016

Zygon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Affiliation with a scientific area or degree program could affect one´s religious beliefs and acceptance of evolution; however, this issue has been poorly studied. Moreover, little information is available regarding Chilean university scientists' views on religion and evolution. This study aims to provide the first documentation of the opinion of scientists at a Chilean University with regard to religion and evolution. This was done by conducting a personal survey of first and last year undergraduate students, graduate students, and faculty. We found that nonreligiosity, as well as acceptance of Darwinian evolution, increased with possession of an advanced degree and this correlation was stronger for individuals who study biology and physics in comparison to those who study chemistry. Although less than 30 percent of undergraduate students are atheists/agnostics, more than 70 percent of faculty members are atheist or agnostic. However, most of the surveyed scientists did not see a conflict between science and religion.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 61%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of Academic Degree and Discipline on Religious Beliefs and Evolution Acceptance: Survey at a Chilean University

Marín¹,

D’Elı́a²

2016

Zygon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Approximately 35% of the public believes that it is not possible to accept God and evolution , and 55% of the public agreed that science and religion are often in conflict (Masci 2009). Interestingly, a recent study of eminent scientists in the Royal Society showed that about equal numbers of scientists agreed and disagreed with the statement that religion and science are non-overlapping domains of discourse and can peacefully coexist, 28.4% vs. 24.3%, respectively; however, biological scientists were more likely to say they see a conflict between science and religion than physical scientists (Stirrat and Cornwell 2013). Elite scientists at both the National Academies of Science (Larson and Witham 1998) and the Fellows of the Royal Society (Stirrat and Cornwell 2013) overwhelmingly reject a belief in God -only about 8% of both groups indicated belief (Lugo et al 2008).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The relative importance of religion and education on university students’ views of evolution in the Deep South and state science standards across the United States

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: There is a negative relationship between education and religiosity and a positive relationship between education and acceptance of evolution, but how this manifests in college students who differ in degree of religiosity and prior educational experiences is unclear. We focused our study on the relative importance of education and religion on evolution understanding for college students at a large, public university in the Deep South. Methods: We used a structural equation model incorporating both acceptance and knowledge of evolution to evaluate the relative influence of religion and education on evolution understanding of 2,999 surveyed students. We further focused on acceptance of evolution and academic level, college major, high school experience, religion, and religiosity. We conducted pre and post course evaluations in three biology classes, and finally we tested the relationships between the quality of K-12 state science standards and states' religiosity and educational attainment. Results: We found that the degree of religiosity mattered significantly more than education when predicting students' understanding of evolution. When we focused on acceptance of evolution only, students taught evolution or neither evolution nor creationism in high school had significantly higher acceptance than those taught both evolution and creationism or just creationism. Science majors always outscored non-science majors, and not religious students significantly outperformed religious students. Highly religious students were more likely to reject evolution even though they understood that the scientific community accepted the theory of evolution. Overall, students in two of three biology classes increased their acceptance of evolution, but only those students that seldom/never attended religious services improved. K-12 state science standard grades were significantly and negatively correlated with measures of state religiosity and significantly and positively correlated with measures of state educational attainment.

show abstract

“…In three other polls in 1981, 2005, and 2006, about a third of respondents thought it was not possible to believe in both God and evolution (Plutzer and Berkman, ). The enormous disparity between the degree of belief in God of elite scientists (about 7% of the US scientists at the National Academy of Sciences and 8% of British Fellows of the Royal Society; Larson and Witham, , Stirrat and Cornwell, ) and the general public (95%: Gallup and Lindsay, ) has been noted as evidence for incompatibility of science and religion (Coyne, ). Yet, a more recent study of nearly 1,700 scientists found that nearly half are religious, and many others label themselves as “spiritual,” with only a small minority of them actively hostile toward religion (Ecklund, ).…”

Section: Poll Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Accepting, understanding, teaching, and learning (human) evolution: Obstacles and opportunities

Pobiner

2016

American J Phys Anthropol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Questions about our origin as a species are universal and compelling. Evolution-and in particular human evolution-is a subject that generates intense interest across the world, evidenced by the fact that fossil and DNA discoveries grace the covers of major science journals and magazines as well as other popular print and online media. However, virtually all national polls indicate that the majority of Americans strongly reject biological evolution as a fact-based, well-tested, and robust understanding of the history of life. In the popular mind, no topic in all of science is more contentious or polarizing than evolution and media sources often only serve to magnify this polarization by covering challenges to the teaching of evolution. In the realm of teaching, debates about evolution have shaped textbooks, curricula, standards, and policy. Challenges to accepting and understanding evolution include mistrust and denial of science, cognitive obstacles and misconceptions, language and terminology, and a religious worldview, among others. Teachers, who are on the front lines of these challenges, must be armed with the tools and techniques to teach evolution in formal education settings across grades K-16 in a straightforward, thorough, and sensitive way. Despite the potentially controversial topic of human evolution, growing research is demonstrating that a pedagogical focus on human examples is an effective and engaging way to teach core concepts of evolutionary biology. Am J Phys Anthropol 159:S232-S274,

show abstract

Eminent scientists reject the supernatural: a survey of the Fellows of the Royal Society

Cited by 14 publications

References 7 publications

Effect of Academic Degree and Discipline on Religious Beliefs and Evolution Acceptance: Survey at a Chilean University

Effect of Academic Degree and Discipline on Religious Beliefs and Evolution Acceptance: Survey at a Chilean University

The relative importance of religion and education on university students’ views of evolution in the Deep South and state science standards across the United States

Accepting, understanding, teaching, and learning (human) evolution: Obstacles and opportunities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About