Science and Religion Forum

By Novella, Steven | Skeptic (Altadena, CA), Winter 2001 | Go to article overview

Science and Religion Forum

Novella, Steven, Skeptic (Altadena, CA)

There is a ongoing debate within the skeptical movement (and beyond) which is framed as the question of the relationship between science and religion. The Vol.8 No.2 issue of SKEPTIC was almost entirely dedicated to this question, and in this issue Massimo Pigliucci contributed an excellent article which provided a roadmap to this important debate. The article defined the various positions on this topic, covering the spectrum from the position that there is no conflict between science and religion, to the belief that they are in direct conflict.

Among the various positions, Pigliucci included scientific skepticism, using as a source for his definition of scientific skepticism an article written by myself with David Bloomberg. Although Pigliucci seems at times to understand the essence of scientific skepticism, he misrepresented some of the key points in the article.

The essence of scientific skepticism is that it seeks to recast the distinction to be drawn as that between science and faith, not science and religion. Science, it is argued, deals with the natural world and must work with testable--meaning potentially falsifiable--hypotheses. Faith is defined as a personal choice to believe an hypothesis that is not testable, or falsifiable, and is therefore outside the realm of science. Scientific skepticism puts this distinction at the center of its philosophy because it is elegantly simple and practical. According to the "rules" of scientific skepticism, one should not use faith to answer questions of physical reality which are testable, as this is the realm of science. Also, one should not attempt to use science to answer untestable questions of faith, for it is, by definition, not able to do so.

Religion is more complex than just faith. There are countless religions and each one contains a unique assortment of beliefs based upon faith, morality, philosophy, and aesthetics. Some may also violate the rules of scientific skepticism by claiming to have the answers to questions which are clearly in the realm of science, but others, scrupulously, do not.

Pigliucci's definition of scientific skepticism is essentially what I just described above, although I think he missed the main point, i.e. that the real distinction is between science and faith, not religion. For example he writes, "However, scientific skepticism immediately embarks on a slippery slope that the same authors acknowledge in their article. They admit that 'Testable religious claims, such as those of creationists, faith healers, and miracle men are amenable to scientific skepticism,' so that religion is not entirely out of the scope of skeptical inquiry." But we never said that it was--faith is. Whenever religion trespasses into science then scientific skepticism applies. Pigliucci's slippery slope argument turns out to be a straw man. In fact the strength of scientific skepticism is that there is an identifiable line of demarcation with one rule--can the claim be empirically tested?

Pigliucci then goes on to advocate what he calls "scientific rationalism." This basically states that when dealing with religious claims it is appropriate to use scientific methods to deal with scientific issues and philosophical methods to deal with philosophical issues. Therefore, if a religion makes a faith-based claim that is untestable and therefore outside of the realm of science, defenders of rationalism can and should use "philosophy and logic" as their methods of inquiry. Scientific skepticism, however, would simply point out that the claim is outside the realm of science and stop there.

Pigliucci also takes one quote completely out of context. He writes, "Furthermore, they (Novella and Bloomberg) acknowledge that there is no distinction in principle between religion and any other kind of nonsense believed by all sorts of people: 'There is no distinction between believing in leprechauns, alien abductions, ESP, reincarnation, or the existence of God--each equally lacks objective evidence. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Cite this article

Cited article

Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25,

Note: primary sources have slightly different requirements for citation. Please see these guidelines for more information.

Cited article

Science and Religion Forum


Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25,

    New feature

    It is estimated that 1 in 10 people have dyslexia, and in an effort to make Questia easier to use for those people, we have added a new choice of font to the Reader. That font is called OpenDyslexic, and has been designed to help with some of the symptoms of dyslexia. For more information on this font, please visit

    To use OpenDyslexic, choose it from the Typeface list in Font settings.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Author Advanced search


    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.