The Conflict Between Religion And Science

The scientific revolution established the new view of the universe. During this period people were finally beginning to define the scientific method and apply it to search for the truth. The scientific ideas of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries overturned many of the most fundamental ideas of the medieval worldview. New knowledge of the physical world provided occasions for challenging the authority of the church and of scripture. The new ideas then began to displace and reshape religious models of thought. Even though the scientific revolution exposed humankind to the truths of the world, the new science posed a potential challenge to religion.

Natural science and religion are two areas of knowledge that perceive knowledge using ways of knowing differently to pursue its knowledge, an example of that would be Charles Darwin and his theory of natural selection and evolution. In natural science, the theory of natural selection is derived from studying the common features in the bone structure of vertebrate limbs despite its varied use. Therefore, using deductive reasoning, they established the evolution theory which states that humans evolved from apes due to the fact that human and apes have similar features and that human has evolved due to adaptation and survival of genes. However, religion, using not only intuition and emotions but also reason disagrees with the claim of evolution.

I have chosen the article, Does Science Threaten Religion? (p. 497) as my focus for this tutorial. I strongly believe the article uses the structural-functionalism approach as well as scientific sociology.

This debate examines the controversies that arise regarding stem cell research and whether or not the cell is an inherent human person. She points to five values that one, as a catholic theology thinker, should focus on. These five values are: The value of nascent life, the value of moral virtue or moral integrity, the value of medical benefits, the value of distributive justice or just institutions, and the value of a social ethos of generosity and solidarity (Lysaught, page 696). One of the most important values that Lysaught touches upon would be the value of moral virtue. Specifically from the Christian standpoint, morals are key to fulfilling a virtuous life. Lysaught claims that, “This value may be translated into the principle that one ought always to act with moral integrity and never act against one’s conscience” (Lysaught, page 699). Here, Lysaught is arguing for the importance of our own free will as well as the inherent values that we as people are capable of using. Most arguments in favor of stem cell research come from the research that shows the promising potential use of the cells, such as treating or potentially curing diabetes, spinal injuries, Alzheimer’s, and many other life threatening chronic diseases. This hope for the cells however comes at a serious cost according to Christians. A Christian

More than one ethical position on stem cell research could be called "religious"; and as a Christian, could ethically support stem cell research because of its potential for relieving human suffering and enhancing human health and well-being. There is more than one way to be moral, more than one way to translate one's faith commitments into public policy. (185)

In 1859, Charles Darwin published his biological book: The origin of Species (Wyhe). This book sparked controversy over science and religion. The book claimed creation must have taken a much longer time to develop than the bible claimed it did. Many religious institutions were hostile to the publication, but many scientist welcomed the idea of evolution through natural selection. The book divided England between the religious and the scientific. Individuals often found themselves contemplating between God and science.

Science is defined on Merriam-Webster as, “knowledge about or study of the natural world based on facts learned through experiments and observation.” People love to study and execute science, whether they get a job as a scientist, or they just examine a bumblebee in their backyard as a child. Science has an attractive pull to all human beings. Christians especially, are interested in the beautiful world around them created by their wonderful, powerful God. Man is sinful. Therefore, all people who study science without a biblical worldview will come to the wrong conclusion about the world and God. Christians, with the help of the bible and their own observing, will come up with the correct conclusion. First science and Christianity have differing

Evolution is one of the major concepts in biology that had aroused a struggle between science and religion. There are two different viewpoints that have appeared from this conflict, one from scientists and one from the creationists. The scientists view evolution as a long-term process during which living organisms have developed over time. The teaching method that they see fit to this concept is through material in biology textbooks. These textbooks contain information on how certain species, organisms, and terrains evolved over time. However, the creationists have an opposing viewpoint on evolution. They view evolution not from the scientific standpoint, but from the biblical and religious standpoint - that God had created everything. Creationists object to evolution mainly because of this standpoint. Thus, they believe that evolution should not be studied through the scientific information found in textbooks, but instead it should be studied from the bible. According to the creationists, the bible has a wide variety of statements that show how God had played a major role in the creation of the universe, and in the evolution of species, all of which relate to the scientific “development over time” standpoint. Ken Ham, who is interviewed in the pbs video “What about God,” says that evolution is an evil to be fought, and he points out some of the conflicts the bible has with secular science that deals with origins. One of the conflicts that he listed was that “the Bible says

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.

Stem cell research is the study and use of embryonic and adult cells towards development of medical science. The study of stem cells has become a major focus in the world of medicine because of its great potential to cure common illnesses such as; Parkinson’s disease, cerebral palsy and diabetes. The study of maturing stem cells gives scientists insight into possible cures for these diseases and potentially can give information on how they occur.

The relationship between science and religion has been debated for many years. With strong personal opinions and beliefs, it is not surprising that no progress has been made in this argument. In my opinion, I feel as though religion and science have to be related in some way. There is no possible way people can separate two things that attempt to prove the same facts. My belief is that a metaphorical bridge has to be formed to connect the two. Personally, I feel as though science can be a compliment to religion, and that the scientific discoveries can and should be used to prove that God exists, not disprove it. If science did this, then the relationship between science and religion could be a friendly one. If that

Often claims are made that science and religion are incompatible; the two cannot coexist as to believe in God contradicts scientific belief. To look at science and think of it in a completely separate field to religion is not true a true reflection of the relationship between the two. Science and religion overlap in several ways. They both affect our everyday decisions and impact on the way we view and understand the world around us. They both address ‘the same world, the same reality.’ just in different ways, looking at the world through a slightly different perspective. The two coincide in society and affect each in different ways.

Science has had a short life when compared to religion. Yet we've seen civilizations better themselves a thousandfold since hands unclasped, grabbed scientific instruments and started measuring the world. Is science some form of new religion? Or is science different from religion? Debates of this matter have been common since the dawn of science. Articles on their differences, similarities and clashings have crept up on society and affected everyone in the western civilization. Most recently, religious fanatics have resorted to new methods to reach out to potential followers, using scientific arguments in a seemingly desperate attempt to reestablish the stranglehold religion had in the pre-scientific era.

Science and religion have always been on opposing ends of the spectrum when it comes to most issues. This is most evident in the long running dispute between creationists and evolutionists about the origins of life. Evolutionists believe in evolution through natural selection, while creationists believe that the universe and all the life in it was formed by divine creation. This dispute started in the late 18th century and has only intensified as the years went on. Before the 18th century a lot more people believed in divine creation, but as science progressed, more and more people switched sides to the evolutionist side.

“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.” This famous quote was spoken by a man even more famous for his scientific works in the fields of physics and mathematics. Albert Einstein, famous scientist, is found here stating that without religion science is, essentially, useless. Surely it is impossible for a man so accomplished in the scientific field to seriously consider the possibility of God? Certainly, we live in a time where there has been much condemnation and ridicule of the idea of faith by scientists such as Dawkins and Atkins, but does that mean that these two world views are incompatible? Although I really respect the work of both of those great biologists in my view, faith and science are definitely compatible.