Religion Is Inevitable

Today I have a new essay up at National Review discussing why American progressives can no longer refer to themselves as “the party of science.” If the last few years have revealed anything, it’s that our ideological battles are inescapably religious.

Here’s an excerpt:

The inconvenient truth is that there is no “party of science,” just as there is no “right side of history.” All ideological tribes use scientific research when the result supports their priors and downplay it when it doesn’t.

There is a meaningful difference, though, between cultural conservatives and progressives. Conservatives, at least historically, have been willing to take their ideas above the rim of materialism, to argue against scientism and emphasize the transcendent and spiritual. For almost a century, arguably dating back to the Scopes trial, progressives have taken the opposite approach, forming an unwritten alliance with irreligious partisans of higher ed and instinctively deferring to science when it collides with faith or tradition. It’s not that one party believes in science and one party disbelieves it. It’s that only one party claims that’s the case.

Read the entire piece here. Thanks to the kind folks at National Review for the opportunity.

Author: Samuel D. James

Believer, husband, father, acquisitions editor, writer.

3 thoughts on “Religion Is Inevitable”

  1. When faced with people who like to use their interpretation of science as a weapon for political objectives (generally control), I inject quantum mechanics to the discussion. Our team has been working with quantum computing for the past few years and we are continue to delve deeper into strange characteristics that form a critical part of the environment we call “reality”. This new discussion tends to re-baseline the conversation with a new level of humility as we all stand in awe. Separately I question how photonic behavior represents aspects of God as His entire creation fits into His plan. .


  2. Your opening comment about obesity and science seems oversimplified to me. Yes, we all know that being overweight causes worse health, but science has also found that interventions to reduce weight are not very successful. So it may be true to say that 1) science shows people who are overweight are going to face significant health problems as a result and 2) science has shown that efforts to help people lose weight, short of surgery, are unlikely to do much good, so we should probably not direct social opprobrium at overweight people in the misguided belief that it will help them. Sugar taxes seem to work a little better. Also, you missed some updates to the Brown story, involving the republication (many months ago) of the gender dysphoria paper with a few caveats in response to objections.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s