I think David Berlinski is getting at something important but ultimately misses the target. I don’t think that scientists are drawn to atheism because they are trying to protect their status or power.
They are drawn to it because of a mistake that scientists make in expanding the rules of science to cover all domains of knowledge acquisition. Reliance on supernatural explanations is essentially forbidden in scientific inquiry (and appropriately so), but the scientist makes the mistaken generalization that this must apply to all forms of knowledge and human reasoning. Atheism is a philosophy that also rejects supernaturalism and so scientists think it must be true, or at least are drawn to it because of shared philosophical foundations.
If arrogance plays a role, it occurs when scientists think the rubes are too dense to see the wisdom of science in all domains of life.
In my experience, only in very rare circumstances are scientists drawn to atheism because of a desire to protect their turf and I think Derb is going to hammer away at this explanation.
