Essay on Science and Relgion

The church itself changed how scientists as a whole worked, scientists didn’t dedicate their works to their inspirations, or their mothers or fathers like most authors (scientific or not) do today. In Copernicus’ case, his work was dedicated it to the church, easily showing how large of a power this was and how is changed the way scientists wrote. In very few to no astrology textbooks from the twenty first century will you find the words ‘moses’ or ‘the wisdom of God’, because while the church is powerful today, it has no where near the ‘sway’ it had back a few hundred years ago. This power not only affected the way people spoke, but how they lived and how history and science and math was recorded, everything revolved around the church, everything was static to the church, and yet later on, it

An important thing to remember is that is the 16th and 17th centuries, there was no separation between State and the Church. Most/all rules in the State had to do something with the Bible and how it had been interpreted, and it anyone had opposed the ideas of the Bible, they would not only get punished by the church, but also by the State. This made it laborious to try to prove an idea with science, just as Galileo was trying to do. Not even the smallest accusation about the church was taken lightly, “As you know, the Council [of Trent] prohibits interpreting the Scriptures contrary to the common agreement of the holy Fathers.” (Document B). At this point Galileo had only just started his discoveries, and sharing them with the public and church. Even though Galileo never explicitly vocalized that the scriptures were wrong, just by throwing the idea out that the Earth revolved around the Sun, caused disagreement from the Church and State. The timing that Galileo started to speak about his discoveries and thoughts about the universe was not the best. He started to say his ideas only a little after Bruno. Galileo supported Bruno’s idea on how the universe worked. This was probably not the best idea for Galileo, considering that Bruno had been burned to death in 1600, for the popular belief that he was going against the Bible. The main difference between

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

During the Scientific Revolution, in the 17th century, several philosophers began to doubt scientific knowledge of the Holy Scriptures. One of those philosophers, Galileo, discovered a new innovation that could have changed the viewpoint on the Church’s Scripture accuracy. Galileo discovered that the sun stayed still as the Earth revolved around it, which was the opposite of what the Church taught. During this time, it was very dangerous for Galileo to oppose the Church. This was because doubts about the Church would lead to a loss of its power and the people’s trust, which was unwanted.

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.

Furthermore, in discussing the conflict between the Church and scientists such as Galileo, it must be noted that both parties held themselves to be unquestionably correct in the argument, because they both based themselves in what they believed to be irrefutable truth. The Church viewed the holy

They refused to have society corrupted by what they deemed as “heresy,” (anything they thought contradicted the Bible) and as such took measures to prevent its spread such as the banning of books and the imprisonment or execution of the culprits. These sanctions those involving science which ultimately led to a slower progression of the scientific industry. With this concepts such as geocentricity remained the prevailing “truth,” even though evidence showed otherwise. Unlike today, a majority of the “scientists” were religious devoted, one of which was Galileo. In the early stages of his making, he was a man like everyone else and in being like everyone else, he needed money, food, etc. Given those necessities, his primary focus was on fulfilling those necessities, not the advancing of science. In fact his initial area of study was in engineering which primarily consisted of building weapons and other naval equipment. One could say that it was a coincidence that he took a turn for science as he had first heading to sell the telescope once he had improved

During the Enlightenment it was extremely difficult for faith and science to get along with each other, this occurred because the new discoveries were very different to what people of faith believed. People of faith believed that god had created everything and that everything that occurred was because that was what god had created it for. The scientific community was coming up with scientific and mathematical laws that described what was occurring in the universe. There were many scientific ideas that the Catholic Church could not agree with and thought them to be completely against faith. One of those was Copernicus work On the Revolutions of Heavenly Spheres. This book was considered so much against faith that it was placed on the Index

As Albert Einstein once said, “Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.” Without the intellectual advancements made by countless members of the scientific community, humanity, as we know it would be non-existent. Many innovative scientist and thinkers have had to break barriers set with a heavy hand by the Catholic Church; arguably the most unjustly persecuted was the Italian astronomer Galileo Galilei. Galileo was forced to recant factual discoveries he made because his ideas clashed with the Catholic Church’s.

In the Trial of Galileo, The Roman Catholic church is the largest christian church in the Western civilization .The moral aspect concerns salvation. The Catholic Church was directed by the Holy Scripture by the Church Fathers, which provided the means of eternal salvation: those don 't renounce the Catholic Church of Catholicism place their souls in peril. Protestantism was an enemy Galileo had encountered but it derives the Catholic Church of converts because it deprives people from the true ideal of salvation amongst early catholic people. But in some situations got difficult for Galileo to handle more than one role played. The Galileo case for many anti catholics, is to be proven that church abhors science, refuse to abandon outdated teachings. The Church was not anti-scientific but it supported scientific endeavors for centuries. The Jesuits were a respected group of astronomers and scientist in Rome during Galileo 's time. Individuals and church officials and from the church, were many notable scientist who received fundings. During this time period Church funding from many scientific advances were contributed by clerics. Therefore if Galileo had not been prosecuted with the political controversy of the Catholic Church, he would have lived a longer life contributing more towards his theories and inventions as a scientist than his religious obedience.

Religion and science have always been conflicting studies. Religion, being based on faith, relies on the supernatural to explain life and being. Science, on the other hand, cannot do this. Scientists need to eliminate the possibility of the unexplainable in order to maintain and control group by which to measure other groups. The unexplainable I refer to are the miracles that are commonplace in all supernatural religions. Galileo lived in a time where church was state. The land was ruled according to the words of the bible, and anyone in opposition would be in contempt. Galileo's scientific findings were therefore strongly shunned by the church. In 1615 Galileo attempted to explain how these findings came to be

Even though Galileos beliefs were held in practicing Catholicsim, his writings were showing evidence for “Copernican heliocentrism.” The Catholic Church, however, disapproved of heliocentricity, feeling that it was contrary to the statements in the Bible: if God created human beings as His supreme creation, He would place man at the center of His cosmos. (At that time the more literal Biblical interpretation was prevalent with the church fathers, especially among the Dominican Order, facilitators of the Inquisition)2 However, real power layed with the Church, and Galileo's arguments were most fiercely fought on the religious level. Cardinal Robert Bellarmine insisted that Galileo furnish more adequate proof of his new theories before he would be allowed to teach them as true or even as probably true.

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

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.

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