The Relationship between Religion and Science

The relationships between ‗Science and Religion' has been a subject of continuous discussion among scholars in recent years. In the present article it has been endevoured to analyze and discussed this relationship. These two great cultural forces have multi-faceted relations which have been evolved as a historical phenomena since ages as philosophers, theologians, scientists, and others have studied them as a subject. Science and religion are complex subjects and it is very difficult to define them, however, we may define science is the observation, experimental investigation, theoretical explanation of phenomenon, activities based on the study of an object and mainly based on the facts as well as it can be proved by scientific analysis. i Science cannot be explained on the basis of supernatural phenomenon as it has no evidence. On the other hand, religion may be defined as it is a supernatural belief in which human being worships superhuman power i.e. God or goddess. Moreover, science and religion are complementary ii as science examines the natural worldscientifically, iii while religion involves to the spiritual as well as a supernatural phenomenon. Science and religion have their own individually and importance as they deal with several different aspects of human activities and experience. Science is rational as it deals with the facts, experiment, observation and proved to be true through experiments. iv Some scientists consider that things happen naturally, some do not consider the existence of Gods or Goddesses and others opine that one or more deities exist, but they do not interfere with nature. On the other hand, religion deals with faith and beliefs. There are approximately 270 large religious groups and thousands of smaller groups in existence in the world as well as there are more than one thousand Christian religious organizations only which are operative in the U. S. A. and Canada. All these religious groups have different conflicting beliefs pertaining Gods, deity, humanity and the rest of the universe. Some religious groups consider themselves completely true, others believe that their faith in humanity was revealed by God Himself in the form of holy books as well as some religious groups consider that all religions are man made other than their own religion. Each religion has some enthusiastic followers who claim that only their faith is correct and according to them it would explain vividly the ways of the world. Most religions consider that they have been taught the absolute truth by God through revelation. Religious faiths involve in myths, traditions and the existence of supernatural powers or entities, and in their beliefs, there is an absence of rationality and logic or scientific experimentalism. Science and religion are involved continuously for centuries in heated debates for domination about discerning the secret of life. Science accepts reasoning, phenomenalism and evidence, on the other hand, religions include faith, belief, holiness, revelation and philosophical as well as supernatural explanations regarding the study of the secrets of the universe. Science and religion are dynamic and timeless as they are complex cultural endeavors which have been transforming through the ages. v Traditional religious societies achieved maximum scientific and technical inventive conceptions anterior to the Renaissance. Islam, Christians, Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, and Confucian scholars were the pioneers to use innovative scientific methods. Hinduism has historically adopted reasoning as well as experimentation to make scientific

Ereba Barida, 2019

‘Religion and Science’ are two important phenomena that require proper understanding. Prof. Wotogbe-Weneka, in his, “Themes in Comparative Religion” (2014, 1) opine that “The uniqueness of Religion as a phenomenon of human concern lies in the fact that unlike other spheres of human concern, everybody is interested in Religion, be he a believer to whom his faith is a matter of ultimate concern or a person who thinks he does not believe an cannot believe in the supernatural rulership of the universe”. Unfortunately, the reality of human homo religiosus in Wotogbe-Weneka’s verbiage, viz-a-viz the pluralistic nature of beliefs made it difficult for scholars to come up with a universally acceptable normative definition of religion. However, for the purpose of doing justice to this presentation, we shall consider religion as, “a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things…”

Science and religion are the two grand visions of the world, so it is important to study their relationship. This relationship can be considered from the historical, philosophical and social point of view. The nature of science and technology on one side and of religion and religiosity on the other are briefly considered. After some preliminary considerations the difference between science and ideology is established. The relationship between science and religion is considered under five categories: conflict, independence, dialogue, complementariness and integration. Inevitable conflict is rejected on historical ground, although attitudes generating conflicts are present in the religious and scientific fundamentalisms. Independence assures the necessary autonomy of each one, but it is not sufficient. Dialogue is a good and desirable relationship that will enrich both of them. Complementariness adds to the dialogue that both visions of the world are not complete in themselves, so that they need to complement each other. Integration is a more problematic proposition and several approaches have been proposed. They can be grouped into those that go from the knowledge of nature to God and from a religious position to the knowledge of nature and science. As a conclusion a fruitful dialogue is proposed which recognizes the mutual autonomy between science and religion.

distinguishes man from the other a n i r n a l~.~ The study of man cannot be complete unless it includes the study of his religion, for it is a very important and outstanding feature of human life. The religious faith and practices are intimately connected with human nature and life in general. However unrefined a religion might have been in its origin, and however gross the superstitions with which it has often been associated, its omnipresence and centrality in the history of humanity are facts to be reckoned with.3 The religious perceptions and sensitivity helped man a lot to keep alive and hopeful in his hazardous journey through history.4 In many cases the bonds of religion have proved stronger than the bonds of race or climate or even descent.

Anpere: Anthropological Perspectives on Religion, 2007

Religion is a collection of behavior that is only unified in our Western conception of it. It need not have a natural unity. There is no reason to assume, and good reason not to assume, that all religious behavior evolved together at the same time in response to a single shift in the environment. This article does not look at the religion as a unified entity and seek a definition of its essence. Instead, it looks at what science needs to know in order to discover how and why religion came into existence as a human behavior. What does science need to know about religion, or how should religion be defined so that science can look at it? A definition that refers to observable behavior is required. Then, a preliminary hypothesis to orient observations is proposed. I suggest a preliminary hypothesis consisting of three stages in the evolution of religion:(1) a cognizer of unobservable agents, (2) a sacred category classifier, and (3) a motivator for public sacrifice. Each one of these stages is a nucleus of modern anthropological theorizing. Although they all come together in the Western folk concept of religion, this article proposes that they are independent evolutionary complexes that should not be lumped together, but should be investigated as separate types of religious behavior

Ars Disputandi: The Online Journal for Philosophy of …

Publications in the eld of `science and religion' are booming business. New books on the subject appear almost every day. However, rarely does one encounter a book of philosophical depth that attempts to map out the many social, philosophical, and religious complexities of the interaction between science and religion. This book by the Swedish philosopher of religion Mikael Stenmark tries to provide this. This book can be considered as the third part of a trilogy, of which the rst two volumes are Rationality in Science, Religion, and Everyday Life 1 , and Scientism. 2 The book presently under review, with the more general title How to Relate Science and Religion takes up and extends ideas and arguments from the former books but it also attempts to take the religion and science discussion to a higher level. [2] The heart of the book is Stenmark's `multilevel' or `multidimensional' model of possible relationships between science and religion. This model Stenmark describes as `a relational model . . . that takes into account the fact that science and religion are social and dynamic practices and thus not static entities. Therefore it is not possible to determine a priori where the borderline goes between science and religion since that could change as these practices develop and transform over time ' (12). This multidimensional model should be able to map the interactions between science and religion, while acknowledging the contextual character of those interactions. Relations between science and religion are possible at four levels: the social level (the social interactions between practitioners of both science and religion), the teleological level (the aims that practitioners of both science and religion have in mind when they do what they do), the epistemological level (beliefs, methods, theories and concepts), and the theoretical level (the subject matter and content of both science and religion). The rest of the book is structured according to these levels. Chapter 1 introduces Stenmark's multidimensional model. Chapter 2 deals with the social dimension of science and religion. Chapter 3 deals with the aims of science and religion. Chapters 4 6 deal with the epistemological dimension, and chapters 7 9 with the theoretical 1.

lamar.colostate.edu

Physics and biology are the two principal natural sciences affecting contemporary religious thought. Both have developed at microscopic and megascale levels, unknown when the Christian or other world faiths were founded. Astronomy opens up vast space and time; atomic physics reveals strange elemental particles. Evolutionary biology finds deep time on Earth, molecular biology reveals the building blocks and coding for life. Geology first raised the question of vast time scales. Technical sciences, such as medical science and computer science, raise both theoretical and ethical issues, often because they make possible novel, sometimes quite unprecedented, human actions; examples include questions about therapeutic genetics made possible by sequencing human DNA, or about cloning. Theologians also interact with the social sciences-psychology, anthropology, economics, history-although they are not addressed directly here. Science as we know it today arose in the Christian West, with both Greek and Hebrew roots. Historians often find that such science required the monotheist worldview for its origins, providing the belief that the world is ordered and rational, knowable by observation, and that humans have the power and destiny, as Kepler said, to "think God's thoughts after him." Scientists often insist that the scientific method, especially since the European Enlightenment (the last four centuries), is based on reason and observation; they seek theory corroborated by evidence. Currently they often contrast this with "faith," or belief in things not seen and not proved. They advocate repeatability or testability, although many of the phenomena scientists investigate (such as the big bang or origin of life) are historical and not directly repeatable or testable. Further, scientists often "believe" in what their theories suggest should be there-for example, spending

2008

North Americans live in a place and at a time when the practice of religion seems to be making a comeback. Even though Western Civilization has long embraced a secular approach to daily life, banishing religion to the private realms of personal morality, spiritual devotion, and ecclesiastical ritual, many orthodox Christians, Jews, and Muslims continue to assert the public relevance of their faith. This is obviously true in politics, where a number of moral agendas are being pursued, but religious concerns have also been broached in other areas, such as biotechnology research, energy use, and environmental care.

The study reports a research which was conducted on 640 respondents of Malaysian society to know their perception on the relation between science and religion. The study was conducted throughout the country of Malaysia involving male and female respondents from the age of 20 to 50 years from various ethnics and religious backgrounds. The study was conducted by using the questionnaire method in which the respondents were asked to respond to given statements on the relation between science and religion and the importance of religion and science for human being. The booklets of questionnaire were collected to be analysed using the SPSS to obtain the mean response according to the ethnic, religious and academic background. T-test were also conducted if the means responses were significantly different. The findings of the study show that generally the respondents accept that science leads people closer to god. The mean response between the different ethnic group’s means was also significant. Moreover, the finding also shows that the respondent accept the importance of religion and science for the well being of the people