The Growing Social and Moral Conflict Between Conservative Protestantism and Science

被引:78
作者
Evans, John H. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Calif San Diego, Dept Sociol, La Jolla, CA 92093 USA
关键词
religion; science; moral conflict; RELIGION;
D O I
10.1111/jssr.12022
中图分类号
C91 [社会学];
学科分类号
030301 ; 1204 ;
摘要
Due to conservative Protestant elites challenging scientists in the public sphere, and prominent scientists attacking religion, scholars have claimed that there is an increasing conflict between conservative Protestants and science. However, these claims have never been empirically investigated and these general claims do not specify what conflict is actually about. In this article I use the General Social Survey from 1984 to 2010 to examine whether conservative Protestants are increasingly opposed to the social and moral influence of scientists. I find evidence for increasing opposition by biblical literalist conservative Protestants to the involvement of scientists in social debates about moral issues.
引用
收藏
页码:368 / 385
页数:18
相关论文
共 33 条
[1]   Comparing logit and probit coefficients across groups [J].
Allison, PD .
SOCIOLOGICAL METHODS & RESEARCH, 1999, 28 (02) :186-208
[2]  
Attridge Harold W., 2009, RELIG SCI DEBATE WHY, P1
[3]   Public perceptions of incompatibility between "science and religion" [J].
Baker, Joseph O. .
PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF SCIENCE, 2012, 21 (03) :340-353
[4]  
Dawkins R., 2006, GOD DELUSION
[5]  
Discovery Institute, WEDG
[6]  
Ecklund EH, 2008, SOC FORCES, V86, P1805
[7]   Conflict Between Religion and Science Among Academic Scientists? [J].
Ecklund, Elaine Howard ;
Park, Jerry Z. .
JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION, 2009, 48 (02) :276-292
[8]  
Ecklund ElaineHoward., 2010, Science Vs. Religion: What Scientists Really Think
[9]   CONSERVATIVE PROTESTANTISM AND PUBLIC-OPINION TOWARD SCIENCE [J].
ELLISON, CG ;
MUSICK, MA .
REVIEW OF RELIGIOUS RESEARCH, 1995, 36 (03) :245-262
[10]   Religion and science: Beyond the epistemological conflict narrative [J].
Evans, John H. ;
Evans, Michael S. .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY, 2008, 34 :87-105