A scientist must go where the evidence leads
&gt; There are major aspects of our life that remain unexplained, leaving professional scientists with the choice of whether to accept the general notion that they will also be resolved one day by the scientific method. ... This ambiguous state of affairs explains why some of the best scientists are religious.<p>This to me reflects huge deficit in the author&#x27;s thinking and perception.<p>It also reflects a common sentiment and so reflects a common deficit in many people&#x27;s thinking and perception, especially in the contemporary Western world.<p>At some point in history, Science and Religion <i>both</i> got tricked into a debate -- both got tricked into thinking that their propositions somehow exist in the same domain when they do not. Their domains are mutually exclusive and yet the conversation continues stupidly (on <i>both</i> sides) as if they were.<p>So a Scientist will say the Resurrection never happened and proceed with their proof leveraging physics and biology. The Scientist makes the first mistake by trying to engage on these grounds, as if any of that fundamentally mattered to the Religious person. The Religious person, not recognizing the flub, takes the bait, and tries to answer the Scientist using the scientific vocabulary (the internet is not short on religious apologists doing just this.)<p>The Religious makes this mistake because they are tricked into thinking that Truth is a pure function of propositions in scientific terms. They are tricked into this rhetoric, at least. They are not fully tricked, though, because after debating on these grounds (and likely losing -- b&#x2F;c after all Science owns those terms, and brought them to the table), the Religious person will still go home and pray, will still go home and live according to the mimetic behaviors of the characters within their faith.<p>What a Religious person derives from their beliefs has nothing -- <i>zero</i>, <i>nothing</i> -- to do with the measurable&#x2F;observable particle interactions of the material world. Even if they say it does, self-reports are not to be trusted here.<p>What a Scientist derives from their observations has nothing -- <i>zero</i>, <i>nothing</i> -- to do with how they approach the world and others in the way of morality, pursuit of contented life, etc. Again self-reports are not to be trusted here.<p>Corollary to this is that <i>everybody</i> is Religious and <i>everybody</i> is Scientific, and plays the card when its needed.