Yes, And it would be interesting to break down the disciplines...biology, physics, psychology, etc....I don't see how a biologist could possibly be religious. It is hard for me to understand why evolution and the Theory of Natural Selection haven't convinced them all to be secular humanists, personally. It seems so convincing to me. And how can a natural scientist ever hold the belief of the literal interpretation or the timetable of ancient religious scripture? Makes no rational sense to hold both worldviews simultaneously.

@mojo5501 I agree that a literal interpretation of scriptures seems very odd for a scientist, but I think most or nearly all of them just say they believe in a higher power. That can mean various things.

There actually is a breakdown by discipline on the latter pages, with chemists being most likely to believe in a higher power.

I can see easily how the theory of evolution can resonate with spirituality. Studies in epigenetics cast doubt on the idea that random mutations followed by natural selection are the only drivers of evolution. In other words, evolution is not a mindless, mechanistic process but is guided by some mysterious force not well understood. I am flabbergasted that people continue on and on railing about the sanctity of their belief in the mantra of evolutionary science and they refuse to talk about epigenetics.

@TheAstroChuck

Thanks, I appreciate getting your inside view.

My impression of the survey was that most scientists who are not atheists just say they believe in a higher power or something like that. I doubt many of them are hard-line fundamentalist conservatives.

Maybe I need to read it again. There’s a lot of data to be read once a person learns how to get to pages two through four.

@TheAstroChuck IIRC your figures are right in line with the study. Physicists and astronomers are more likely to be atheists than the other disciplines. Oddly, chemists tend to believe in a higher power.

Thanks for your perspective.

Very well said.

But only six percent of the general public said that science has a negative effect.

@WilliamFleming I missed where the article covered the public view of scientists. But I did see this statement: "many in the general public choose not to believe scientific theories and discoveries that seem to contradict religious or other important beliefs." Therefore, they aren't convinced by the scientific explanation...they 'choose not to believe' in ideas that threaten their religious conviction. Scientists need to be public celebrity media figures (like Carl Sagan, Bill Nye, or Neil deGrasse Tyson) to get any traction these days. Role models seem few and far between for the younger generations in the U.S. anyway.

@mojo5501 I was missing most of the article until I learned how to get to the last three pages. That introduction sounds dire but the actual figures are less disturbing.