Phill Oostdyk
Dr. Adams
Eng Comp
“Perhaps one day, a future pope will discover that science can prove the nonexistence of a God-infused soul in a newly fertilized embryo, and the Vatican’s official position will change once again” (p. 107). This is the hope of Lee Silver from his book Challenging Nature. The hope is that scientific discovery will lead the church, in this case the Catholic Church, to completely change their views that have they held for so many years. The fact is that science has always been able to change the views of religion; and will accomplish to do so for years to come.
The Christian belief that a newly fertilized embryo contains a soul dates back to the seventeenth century with the invention of microscopes. People believed that a fertilized egg contains the miniature person called homunculi (p. 104). Because of this thought, it was assumed that since homunculi exist at conception, than they must have a soul also. The homunculi theory was proven to be false in the beginning of the twentieth century with the development of better technology. However, the belief that a soul exists at the time of conception has become a staple of Christian faith.
This is not the first time in history that science is trying to take a gigantic leap forward and religion is standing in the way. In 1622, the Roman Catholic Church forced Galileo recant his findings that the earth is not the center of the universe. The Church placed Galileo on life long house arrest until he died in 1642. It was not until 1992 that the Church finally admitted that they were wrong.
In the case of Silver, his hopes are the religious ‘fundamentalists’ will change their view on ‘when does a human become a human being’. Silver wants these views to change so that science can move forward and help the human race through genetics research. The researching of stem cells will be able to help humans cure currently incurable diseases, help paraplegics walk, and let women unable to have children give birth. Just think of a loved one who suffered a horrible disease like cancer. They would be cured of the disease if this research were allowed to be conducted.
During President George W. Bush’s first term, a stalemate kept embryo-cloning research legal, but not federally funded (p. 136). Only 9 states have passed legislation to fund stem cell research. This national conservatism could be attributed to political fundamentalists and lobbyists. The separation of church and state are nonexistent in this matter because of the fundamentalists’ religious beliefs dictate their political decisions. This is apparent by their belief is fact that a newly fertilized embryo is a human being with a soul.
Silver states that Eastern cultures do not share the hesitancy of stem cell research because the “injunction not to ‘play God’ makes no sense” (p. 136). The religions beliefs of the East generally do not have a God or have multiple Gods. They do not share the Christian belief that one God is the creator and all-powerful, so the debate of when does God ensoul an embryo is lost to them.
The Catholic Church has a steadfast stand on the subject. According to Silver in his discussions with Catholic Bishops about when a human being gets their soul, the response was “we don’t yet know for sure’ (p. 106). The Catholic Church does go on to say that a human being is ‘not just an organism, but a special organism with a human soul provided immediately by God’ (p. 106). The Catholic Church does admit that scientists will never be able to prove the existence of a human soul in an embryo. If the Catholics do not know when an embryo is ensouled and yet they claim that it is when an egg is first fertilized.
Since the being of the human race, religion has dictated how people think. There have been times when religion has told people what to think. Religion has always had a hard stand in what it believes in; always slow to change and adapt. Columbus proved the world is round when religion said it was flat. Galileo proved the earth is not the center of the universe even though the church preached otherwise.
The fact is that religion has always had a definite stand on their values, until modern science and technology, no matter what time period, dictated to them that religion had to adapt. If religion never adapted to science, them everyone might still be praying to Zeus or Odin. Stem cell research is the new wave in medical technology and will help billions of people. It will move forward and have new breakthroughs with or without religious or political opposition. As time has proved, the science will be proved right, and religion will just have to give in.
Silver, Lee M. Challenging Nature: The Clash Between Biotechnology and Spirituality. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2006.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/custom/2005/08/12/CU2005081200827.html 26 Jan 2009
http://encarta.msn.com/media_461577188_761557587_-1_1/galileo_quick_facts.html 26 Jan 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Overall, this is a well thought out, well-written paper. I do not totally agree with your stand, however. The last line of your paper is a harsh one. "As time has proved, the science will be proved right, and religion will just have to give in." Many christians and other religious folks would find this statement offensive. Personally, I believe that science and religion have in the past, and should continue to work together. As far as stem cell research goes, there are alternative ways to retrieve stem cells other than from embryos. I do agree that stem cell research should be made possible for the many people suffering from terminal illnesses and other diseases. When taking stem cells from embryos, it is required that the embryo be terminated. Being that this embryo would eventually become a human being, I do not see this as being ethical. If we use the alternative sources to obtain stem cells, we do not have to worry about killing what will eventually turn into a living human being. It's not that religion will have to give in to science; both science and religion have to work together to produce effects that are seen as ethical and right in the eyes of all.
Phill Oostdyk
Dr. Adams
Eng Comp
“Perhaps one day, a future pope will discover that science can prove the nonexistence of a God-infused soul in a newly fertilized embryo, and the Vatican’s official position will change once again” (p. 107). This is the hope of Lee Silver from his book Challenging Nature. The hope is that scientific discovery will lead the church, in this case the Catholic Church, to completely change their views that have they held for so many years. The fact is that science has always been able to change the views of religion; and will accomplish to do so for years to come.
The Christian belief that a newly fertilized embryo contains a soul dates back to the seventeenth century with the invention of microscopes. People believed that a fertilized egg contains the miniature person called homunculi (p. 104). Because of this thought, it was assumed that since homunculi exist at conception, than they must have a soul also. The homunculi theory was proven to be false in the beginning of the twentieth century with the development of better technology. However, the belief that a soul exists at the time of conception has become a staple of Christian faith.
This is not the first time in history that science is trying to take a gigantic leap forward and religion is standing in the way. In 1622, the Roman Catholic Church forced Galileo recant his findings that the earth is not the center of the universe. The Church placed Galileo on life long house arrest until he died in 1642. It was not until 1992 that the Church finally admitted that they were wrong.
In the case of Silver, his hopes are the religious ‘fundamentalists’ will change their view on ‘when does a human become a human being’. Silver wants these views to change so that science can move forward and help the human race through genetics research. The researching of stem cells will be able to help humans cure currently incurable diseases, help paraplegics walk, and let women unable to have children give birth. Just think of a loved one who suffered a horrible disease like cancer. They would be cured of the disease if this research were allowed to be conducted.
During President George W. Bush’s first term, a stalemate kept embryo-cloning research legal, but not federally funded (p. 136). Only 9 states have passed legislation to fund stem cell research. This national conservatism could be attributed to political fundamentalists and lobbyists. The separation of church and state are nonexistent in this matter because of the fundamentalists’ religious beliefs dictate their political decisions. This is apparent by their belief is fact that a newly fertilized embryo is a human being with a soul.
Silver states that Eastern cultures do not share the hesitancy of stem cell research because the “injunction not to ‘play God’ makes no sense” (p. 136). The religions beliefs of the East generally do not have a God or have multiple Gods. They do not share the Christian belief that one God is the creator and all-powerful, so the debate of when does God ensoul an embryo is lost to them.
The Catholic Church has a steadfast stand on the subject. According to Silver in his discussions with Catholic Bishops about when a human being gets their soul, the response was “we don’t yet know for sure’ (p. 106). The Catholic Church does go on to say that a human being is ‘not just an organism, but a special organism with a human soul provided immediately by God’ (p. 106). The Catholic Church does admit that scientists will never be able to prove the existence of a human soul in an embryo. If the Catholics do not know when an embryo is ensouled and yet they claim that it is when an egg is first fertilized.
Since the being of the human race, religion has influenced how people think. There have been times when religion has told people what to think. Religion has always had a hard stand in what it believes in; always slow to change and adapt. Columbus proved the world is round when religion said it was flat. Galileo proved the earth is not the center of the universe even though the church preached otherwise.
Today, religion has a say in how the world is run. Even though church and state are supposed to be separate, politicians still use their religious beliefs in their judgment. With the restrictions on stem cell research, politicians are trying to halt the progression of science. They are passing laws prohibiting the research in the name of ethical beliefs. In reality, these politicians are using their religious beliefs to impede scientific progress so that religion does have to adapt to science, whether it is admitted or not.
The fact is that religion has always had a definite stand on their values, until modern science and technology, no matter what time period, dictated to them that religion had to adapt. If religion never adapted to science, them everyone might still be praying to Zeus or Odin. Stem cell research is the new wave in medical technology and will help billions of people. It will move forward and have new breakthroughs with or without religious or political opposition. As time has proved, the science will be proved right, and religion will just have to give in.
Silver, Lee M. Challenging Nature: The Clash Between Biotechnology and Spirituality. New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2006.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/custom/2005/08/12/CU2005081200827.html 26 Jan 2009
http://encarta.msn.com/media_461577188_761557587_-1_1/galileo_quick_facts.html 26 Jan 2009
Glenn - I think your counterarguments could have been more clearly presented as such, and that you might have done a little more to explain why they were relevant to the main body of the paper.
Phil - Your initial argument is a dangerously general. For instance, you make the claim that this has "always" been the case - but most people would argue that science as we know it is only a few hundred years old. Beware of large, generic claims! Certainly science as we know it postdates the time when anyone believe in, say, Zeus or Odin.
Now, on to the paper as a whole. You have quite a few paragraphs, most of which make a small point, many of which are directly derived from Silver; there isn't much of what I'd call a "narrative" thread here. In some ways you are accumulating evidence for the (overly) general assertion that science trumps religion, at least over time. But you are you arguing about religion in general, or Christianity in particular? Are you arguing about science in general, or about stem cell research in particular? The potential, more specific paper here is an argument that fundamentalist Christian opposition to stem cell research is both wrong and doomed - but you spend too much time on generalizations to really make this argument effectively.
Post a Comment