Gaining Knowledge In Two Ways Of Knowing By James Bradley

The Old Testament of the Holy Bible gives many examples which provide modern man with guidelines for the use of scientific method. Millam (2008) explains that there is an underlying order in nature demonstrated by the patterns and regularities of God’s creations. These regularities can be seen in the forces of nature and are stable throughout space and time (Millam, 2008). The original classification of species, use of precise measurement, and even the first account of scientific research, are all included in the Old Testament of the Holy Scriptures. God gives scientists some clear frames of reference for seeking knowledge and truth in science.

Thoughts can be fleeting, however some of the feelings resulting from thought and can have a long lasting impact on the mental state of a person. In my metacognitive exploration I found an interesting comparison between the way in which I think and approach my past feelings and the methods which Tim O’Brien, from The Things They Carried, and Paul D from Beloved express their thinking about the past. I have discovered that the expression of thoughts, including memories and feelings, is the key to a healthy mental state of a person.

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 is simply the pursuit of knowledge, the study of what we know, and the quest to know more. Therefore, all scientific studies must by necessity be founded upon the belief that there are objective realities existing in the world and these realities may be discovered and proven. Without absolutes, what would there be to study? How may one know that the findings of science are real? In fact, the very laws of science are founded on the existence of absolute truth. (The Bible Has Answers, 2002, p. 1). Mankind seeks God, hopes for the future, and answers to their deepest questions. Religion itself is a good testimony for absolute truth. It is really evidence that mankind is more than just a highly evolved animal. It is evidence of a higher purpose and of the existence of a personal and purposeful Creator who implanted in the hearts of mankind the desire to know Him. He becomes the standard for absolute truth, and it is His authority that establishes that truth. (The Bible Has Answers, 2002).

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.

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.

Since the dawn of mankind religion has been one of the most significant elements of a society’s social and cultural beliefs and actions. However, this trend has declined due to the general increase in knowledge regarding our the natural sciences. Where we had previously attributed something that we didn’t understand to the working of a higher power, is now replaced by a simple explanation offered by natural sciences. While advocates of Religion may question Natural Sciences by stating that they are based on assumptions, it is important to note the Natural Sciences are based on theories and principles which can be proven using mathematical equations and formulas. Faith however contrasts from the easily visible feasibility of data

The Pivotal Dichotomies of Science and Religion Science can help identify and elaborate upon the laws of nature, help humans ascertain an improved understanding of the universe, and enable people to acquire powerful thinking skills to generate innovative and beneficial ideas. However, in the recent centuries many scholars have addressed the numerous conflicts that have emerged between the fields of science and religion. Although certain similar factors can render science and religion compatible, many differences have caused a contentious divisiveness to permeate between the two fields. Many philosophers have contemplated and debated the relationship between science and religion.

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

Theology and science are different beliefs. Science tends to explain every aspect of life in the most elaborate and

Right brain? Left brain? Both sides are very different and have their own characteristics that help determine what a persons potential strengths and weaknesses will be. “The human brain is split into two halves, each with its own unique abilities. This phenomenon, discovered three decades ago by Nobel Prize winner Dr. Roger Sperry and his associates at the California Institute of Technology, is known as brain lateralization” (Raudsepp, 1992, p. 85). Certain characteristics of a person can go so much deeper then just hobbies that a person enjoys. Brain function can play a major role in how a person perceives their surroundings, such as if someone like to draw or do math. On the other side of that if a person is very analytical and good at subjects in school such as math it could be linked to which side of their brain is dominant.

Many people consider science and religion to be at loggerheads. Other people consider religions and science to be completely unrelated and different facets. The idea that many people have is that science seems to be more popular than the legions since it is based on facts while religion is based on perceptions. However, what many people fail to realize is that science is not the only source of facts, and religion has been effective in reaching out beyond the realms of morals and values. Indeed, science and religions rely on one another in examining and explaining the things that happens in the daily lives of individuals. Although the views of religion and science have been more or less distinct, there are several ways in which science and religions come together. This paper reviews

Although science explains much about life and the universe, some people choose to believe religion.

Upon examination, the methodological naturalism approach to science seems reasonable and fair to all those practicing the scientific method, despite religion. By only regarding the natural, it allows those of different faiths to approach science on an even playing field, in that science does not regard one religion or faith as the basis of understanding or laws; one does not have to adhere to a certain faith to understand the laws of science as it is based in the objectivity of math and science. While methodological naturalism does not draw a direct correlation between science and religion, it does allow for overlap if the scientist is of a particular religion. As Haarsma describes, science does not simply stop at objective

Science “aims to save the spirit, not by surrender but by the liberation of the human mind” (Wilson, 7). Both religion and science seek to explain the unknown. Instead of surrendering reasoning with the traditional religion, a scientific approach one takes full authority over it. Being an empiricist, Wilson takes favors the scientific approach to the question: “why are things the way they are?” This question can pose two meanings: How did this happen, and what is the purpose. Traditional religion answers this question with stories, many of which are impossible to prove or disprove, making them arguments of ignorance. These explanations entail the adherent surrender reasoning and put faith in the resolution. According to Wilson these are always wrong (Wilson, 49). Science is the most effective way to learn about the natural world. Religion is merely speculation.