Comparing Religion And Science From A Sociological Viewpoint

Accordingly, a religious person is devout in the sense that he has no doubt of the significance and loftiness of those super personal objects and goals which neither require nor are capable of rational foundation. They exist with the same necessity and matter-of-factness as he himself. In this sense religion is the age-old endeavour of mankind to become clearly and completely conscious of these values and goals and constantly to strengthen and extend their effect. If one conceives of religion and science according to these definitions then a conflict between them appears impossible. For science can only ascertain what is, but not what should be, and outside of its domain value judgments of all kinds remain necessary. Religion, on the other hand, deals only with evaluations of human thought and action: it cannot justifiably speak of facts and relationships between facts. According to this interpretation the well-known conflicts between religion and science in the past must all be ascribed to a misapprehension of the situation which has been described.

When comparing science and religion there has been a great rift. As long as humanity has believed in a creator there as always been thinkers trying to quantify and evaluate the truth behind religion, trying to disprove or prove a supernatural force.

For most people of the modern age, a clear distinction exists between the truth as professed by religious belief, and the truth as professed by scientific observation. While there are many people who are able to hold scientific as well as religious views, they tend to hold one or the other as being supreme. Therefore, a religious person may ascribe themselves to certain scientific theories, but they will always fall back on their religious teachings when they seek the ultimate truth, and vice versa for a person with a strong trust in the sciences. For most of the early history of humans, religion and science mingled freely with one another, and at times even lent evidence to support each other as being true. However, this all changed

Science and religion are two different words in different disciplines, which are grounded on different foundations with different concepts, perspective and values. Science is built on surveillance of the Mother Nature, but religion is basically founded on faith. Religious people have faith and believe that God exists. Scientists agree that the real of the world can be learned and revealed, which can be concluded with the practice of the logical technique. It is true that science and religion are two different disciplines, but these two discipline can work together perfectly for better health outcome in the health care. It is true science emerges, but without God’s knowledge for the scientist, they cannot have the knowledge that it entails to discover Mother Nature. Different standpoints could emerge with the people who have strong basis for religion or science, with different beliefs and standards. Religious beliefs

This week, Guy Consolmagno lectured on the interaction between religion and science as we know it today. First, Consolmagno claimed that science exists because religion sparked the curiosity among humans to find the laws of the universe. He also mentions that science and religion go hand in hand when trying to understand the universe. Contrary to modern belief, he expressed how practicing science is a means of getting closer to God rather than a means of proving/disproving God. Additionally, Consolmagno makes it clear that even though science is used as a basis to prove/disprove ideas, God cannot be proved/disproved. Before, Consolmagno’s lecture I believed science and religion were opposites that fought to disprove one another. However, I

The conflict between science and religion has always been existed. In many religious institutions, especially Muslim and Jewish, belief in Darwinism or other scientific theories is forbidden (Ferngren, 2002). Therefore, scientific studies in faith schools subsequently differ from normal school one’s. For example, Dawkins (2006) argues that faith schools tend only to teach children in a religious way, avoiding such important curriculums such as science and humanism. Similarly, Cush(2005) states that faith schools provide limited choice of scientific and sociological subjects. The knowledge of science basics is compulsory for every decent citizen in the age of new technologies and scientific humanity progress.

Science and religion were based back in modern days to be the answer to everyone, and society as a whole to handle their issues through the church majority of the time, until science came along and changed the perspective of everyone’s outlook on how they were to solve their conflicts. Within the world today they both still exist and are still being put to use for its main purpose which is to create answers to things we face that need a solution.

I recently read two articles concerning the topics of science and religion. Chet Raymo, author of Miracles and Explanations, offers insight on how science and religion are closely related while David Ludden, author of “Teaching Evolution at a Christian College”, declares that science and religion are too contradicting from one another and that people are unwilling to open their minds to new ideas once they have established their beliefs (Raymo & Ludden, 2011). This is a topic that has had controversy surrounding it for an innumerable amount of years dating back to ancient times when the Catholic Church ruled Europe to present times where we have to decide if we want our children learning about Darwin’s theory of evolution because it might

What one must do to reconcile science and religion is to let go of the idea that one discipline rules out the other (Miller 2001). Professor Ken Brown theorizes that maybe a higher power created a world that was complex and alive at it’s base and then allow it to be self-sustaining, developing on it’s own (Miller 2001) which is a theory that I can agree with. What needs to be understood is that science will never be able to explain why there is or is not a higher power and religion will never be able to explain widely accepted theories like evolution (Miller 2001). They both function on their own realities, one where science answers the natural world around us and one where religion gives meaning to our lives (Miller 2001). The rift is made because there are people that deny the idea that something other than a higher power was behind the beginning of

Religion and science are two subjects most would choose not to discuss in the same vicinity. History has shown how quarrelsome doing so can be. However, as history has progressed into the modern world both science and religion have become more accepted by their somewhat rival. Might this suggest, after the centuries of debate and controversy, that science and religion have somehow grown to be congruent? Perhaps not all religions, for not all religions can agree with one another, let alone science. Despite past differences, the more science and Christianity are studied and compared, some might see similarities. Ultimately, both science and Christianity very well could be attributed to one another, even if some in the two communities would beg

What is the relationship between religion and science? In his book, Consilience, Edward O. Wilson aims to find a unified theory of knowledge. Consilence also seeks to show how science is superior to and can replace religion. In this paper, I intend to show how Wilson understands this relationship and science as well as how. as well as show John Stuart Mill would agree or disagree with Wilson.

It is logical to conclude that science and religion are concerned with different kinds of knowledge. Science deals with facts that can be observed and measured. It focuses on the aspects of life that are within the grasp of human reason. Religion, by contrast, deals with spiritual matters that cannot be observed with the physical senses. One can have feelings about the existence of God and heaven, but one cannot use scientific methods to prove that these things exist. Whereas science is related to the thought processes of the rational mind, religion is based on faith. By definition, faith is something that cannot be understood rationally.

If God cannot check it makes no sense to believe in Him. Also for the materialism God does not exist. Single matter is real, if God is not matter then he does not exist. At the present time and throughout history many scientists have been declared believers, and they believe that faith is contrary at all to the exercise of their research, but claim that the real science, the more progresses, more discovers God. The conflicts between faith and reason have always caused by ignorance of the defenders of one or the other party. For its part the faith to criticize some of the scientific advances, not going against the science, but of particular way of doing science that can attack the dignity of the human being. It should not be in the name of science violate human nature. We must consider that science and faith are a basic point in common, that is the human being. And that both seals must contribute to achieving the happiness of the human being. Science and faith are two ways of understanding the reality, they move in different fields and do not have because interfere. Science has its own techniques and methods to investigate things, life and to man himself. Faith on the basis of fundamental experiences of life refers to a gracious God as the source and savior. In

Both methods and aims of science and religion seem to be different. While science is concerned with materials, religion is linked to spirituality. Science and religion have different aspects in life but also have their own importance and values to people. On the face of it the scope, sphere and method of science and religion are different

When one thinks of religion, Christianity may come to mind. And when one talks about science, Galileo’s name will most likely be mentioned. The relationship between science and religion has had a long complex history. Both strived to answer and explain the way the world and the universe came to exist and why it functions the way it does. However, one subject relies on the supernatural world while the other on the physical world. Christianity, Judaism and other Western religions played a major role in the development of science. Theologians helped determined what theories should be acceptable to the public and other scientist. The most memorable events in history are Galileo’s trial by the Inquisition and the controversy surrounding Darwin’s theory of evolution. Many great scientists were in fact devout in their religions and tried to accommodate religious faith and be flexible with their theories. At the same time, others tried to find a way to connect new discoveries to a divine plan. When the passages of the Bible, for example, were translated literally, it led to conflict between what was thought to be the divine truth and what was proven to be true. Has the religion really shaped the foundation of science or has science transformed what is now believed to be the difference between the supernatural and the natural?