Compare And Contrast The Conflict Between Science And Religion Dbq

Galileo, and others were part of the scientific revolution that doubted religion and placed truth in

Assess the impact of the Scientific Revolution on religion and philosophy in the period 1550 to 1750.

1). Copernicus came from Poland, a very Catholic nation, which explains his choice to dedicate his book to Pope Paul III. John Calvin, a theologian who founded the Calvinist sect of Protestantism, was very fond of astronomy, saying that it shows the wisdom of God (Doc. 2). Other religious figures condemned the work of scientists, like Giovanni Ciampoli, who in a letter to Galileo insisted that Galileo censure facts due to the disagreement of church doctrines to the findings of Galileo (Doc. 3). Other philosophers merged their ideas on the sciences to religious beliefs to please the church and their own traditional beliefs. In a book by Walter Charleton, an English doctor and philosopher, he states that the creation of atoms and arrangement of them could only be achieved by a higher power (Doc. 8). His occupation as a doctor may have led him to this conclusion as the human body is a very complex machine, and it seemed that only God would be capable of engineering such an organism. Another philosopher, Gottfried Leibniz, compares God to an engineer manipulating his machines, further affecting the work of scientists by meshing religious and scientific ideas (Doc. 12). Many scientists’ works were condemned by the church at this time for blasphemy, so many turned to deism, where God made the Universe like a clock and let it run on its own. Many scientists’ work during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was

The Scientific Revolution was a time of discovery during the 16th and 17th centuries. Because of the fact that both the Protestant Reformation and the Scientific Revolution occurred at roughly the same time, there was a significant number of advocates and critics for these new discoveries. Despite the overall growth in support of these new scientific findings, social, religious, and political factors greatly restrained the potential of the Scientific Revolution.

In the 17th Century, there was much controversy between religion and science. The church supported a single worldview that God’s creation was the center of the universe. The kings and rulers were set in their ways to set the people’s minds to believe this and to never question it. From these ideas, the Enlightenment was bred from the Scientific Revolution.

“Galileo made the case for a new relationship between religion and science, challenging in the process some of the powerful church men of his day.” (book p.431). The main goal of his letter was to argue that the world may be explained through science. He believed that it was important to have the two elements in life which was science and religion. The letter explains how the church relied on the Bible as a source of understanding of the human nature based on the pure contents of the Bible. Galileo is emphasizing how ignorance must not be judge as a form of disrespect to the religion but as a source that will permit us to understand the natural phenomena of our environment by experience and observation. The philosopher explains

There was belief that there is a hidden peace in nature that can be expressed in mathematical laws. This belief was expressed in many ways by order and wholeness beneath wild profusion. There were many effects of the scientific revolution like the discovery of astronomy which is the feeling of infinite space that saturates Baroque art and also the rise of analytic reasoning skills. Instruments such as the telescope made by Galileo encouraged the search of skips and map parts of the universe. Many of the Scientific Revolution's findings contradicted accepted church teachings, many of the scientists and astronomers of the age were religious men and were certainly not directly intending to attack common 17th-century theology. Galileo was a devout

Throughout much of history, religion has been the more dominant of the two. The Catholic Church has been prominent in the development of western civilisation for centuries and, especially during the scientific renaissance, had a powerful and widespread influence. At a time when the Catholics and Protestants were battling over control of Europe, science was a controversial topic. The Church was vehemently against any scientific theory which could in any way be seen to undermine the principles of its religion. Scientists had to carefully navigate the Church to avoid prosecution for heresy. Galileo Galilei, himself a dedicated Christian, inspired vigorous opposition from the Church. He worked between the 16th and 17th Centuries and championed Copernicus’ theory of heliocentrism, which placed the Sun at the centre of the universe instead of the Earth, despite the Bible stating ‘the Lord set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved’ . A principle such as his, accepted as common knowledge in today’s society, was found

The study of science has been around for roughly 500 years and yet there has been no clear answer for the existence of god. Followers of God believe that science is an instrument to help up understand god, and science and Christianity are both important parts in the way we understand this world. 3 out of every 5 scientists do not believe that God exists, but the other 2 however, do believe. Science and religion are 2 of the most debated topics in the world and somehow the two could never get on the same page, sometime it evens seems that they’re on opposite ends of the spectrum. The debate I listened to from Intelligence Squared was extremely informal and presented a very distinct and good arguments. There were 4 scientists (2 were for the motion and 2 were against) who spent about 90 minutes trying to convince whether science refutes or doesn’t refute God. I believe that there is a God, however I support science because it’s calculated and can be presented to me on a piece of paper. God wasn’t the person who told us our morals, it was humans who told us how we were supposed to live our lives, and then said this is how God is interpreted. Everyone wants to believe there is life after death, and that karma exists; with that being said there’s just some things science can’t explain. But we know for sure there is an answer because there can’t be a maybe, either god exists or he doesn’t, either there is a heaven or there isn’t; there can’t be a middle. There first question you

Scientific work was encouraged by social factors like religion through religious people who believed that science could contribute to proving God’s greatness, and was also promoted through political leaders. Not all religious people believed that scientific work was harming the thinking of others, in fact, some believed it would help people achieve a greater understanding of God. For example, John Calvin believed that astronomy was beneficial and should be continued because it reveals God’s wisdom (Doc. 2). During a time period where the belief in God was still prevalent, Calvin’s purpose in speaking about the advantages of astronomy was to teach believers that not all science is bad, some sciences may help people understand God. Scientific work was also encouraged through

In the 16th to 17th century, along with the Enlightenment, Galileo shows the human race a neo authority, which is science. Although, science has always been a powerful force long before Galileo’s announcement, most of people treated it as more of a tool, instead of an equally competitive authority with religion. For example, Maimonides is the first philosopher who discusses the contradictory relationship between science and religion. However, Maimonides thinks that the truth of science is compatible with the truth of religion. In his letter to his disciple, Maimonides suggests that although it seems that the truth of science and truth of religious are different, they are actually consistent, because people fail to reinterpret them in a correct way. For this reason, Maimonides and most of people failed to fully capture the power of science until in the 17th century Galileo reintroduced it (the power of science itself). In Galileo’s letter, Galileo points out that because both the Bible and the world are God’s creation, and considering the fact that Bible is ambiguous but Science is clear, theology is incompatible with science. And at this moment, Science itself became a competing authority with

Two significant cases that helped start the science-religion debate. ‘The Italian mathematician Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) and his interaction with the Roman Catholic Church, and the English naturalist Charles Darwin (1809–1882), whose ideas led to controversies with various (mainly Protestant) theologians.’ Galileo’s ideas differed from the church which caused his case called the ‘Galileo Affair’ Galileo was famous for his adaptation sun-centered model of the solar system. Galileo’s support of the ideas of heliocentrism was seen as an offense against the church. Heliocentric books were not allowed and Galileo published one called Sidereus Nuncius which translates to Starry Messenger. Galileo was banned from teaching and spreading heliocentric ideas. He went on by explaining the theory of tides and comets. He explained how tides were evidence of the Earth’s movement. In his later years, Galileo published his Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems which clearly was in favor of heliocentrism. Even though Galileo was not against the church, his ideas were opposite of the church’s in his time period.

Throughout modern times, philosophers have debated the relationship between religion and science. For example, the question has been raised whether science and religion give the same kind of knowledge, thus competing with one another. The alternate view is that they give different kinds of knowledge, thereby complementing one another. Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) was an Italian scientist who addressed this issue. A bit later, the English philosopher David Hume (1711-1776) similarly discussed the kinds of knowledge that can be obtained from religion and science. This paper will consider the views of Galileo and Hume on the subject and will argue that science and religion provide different kinds of knowledge. This does not mean that one side is right and the other side is wrong. Both science and religion are useful to human life.

introduction Religion and Science are very compatible; they both provide knowledge and understanding of human nature and the world in which humankind live. Galileo According to Galileo, there are two kinds of truth. One is the truth acquires through intellects, experience, and vital evidence. The second is the truth acquired through bible teachings. The bible is meant to explain topics that are beyond human reasoning, things that cannot be proven by science. Accordingly, religious truth is strongly based on faith; it depends on the teachings of a divine being and not on evidence. Science, on the other hand, contributes knowledge on things that cannot be literally explained by the Bible; every statement made in science must be proven with facts. Nonetheless, these different truths

There is a clear relationship between science and faith in all the readings. The relationship has been rocky from the beginning, but it began with the philosophers. Galileo brought forth the idea that science and religion were forms of knowledge that came from the same foundations (Harrison, 2010). At the time, which Galileo lived, there was a power struggle between the church and science. Not causing conflict between science and religion, but rather the definition of science. According to a great philosopher Thomas Aquinas, came the Thomisitc view, which stated that intelligence does not oppose faith and reason, but views it as a sanctified knowledge which complement one other for search of truth (Polkinghorne, 2009). Through these two views alone comes an understanding collaboration, science and religion work together to help individuals find their truth.