answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer
Why - HowReligion examines the "WHY" - Science examines the "HOW". AnswerReligion is based on faith.

Science is based on empirical evidence.

I agree with both of the other two answers. As for why do science people and religious people disagree it may have some to do with humans fighting for power, control and influence over other people. Ancient "Holy Books" are NOT science books, however it is likely that the original authors saw their writings as based on observable and verifiable facts of nature and wrote their rules of conduct in an attempt to optimize human behavior before "God" or ( the nature of Nature itself). The " rule" Thou shall not kill is not "to be taken on faith alone" but was viewed by the authors as optimal behavior for humans given the nature of nature itself. Killing other people tends to upset their family members and is therefore a good way to get yourself killed, clearly not optimal behavior. ditto, lying, cheating , stealing, ET. etc. These facts are not "taken on faith alone" but are considered by some to be "observable", based on "empirical evidence".

User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar
More answers
User Avatar

Wiki User

12y ago

It seems as if they are in an unending conflict.

AnswerAbsolutely not, if one adopts real science and true Christianity. As a scientist and Christian I sometimes despair at the rhetoric on both sides claiming that the other is wrong.

Let's look at science first.

Science is based on having an hypothesis or theory, examining evidence for and against it, and, if the evidence always backs up the theory then it becomes a scientific law. The main (possibly, only) theory that 'contradicts' what some believe is Christianity is that of evolution, which states that life on earth evolved rather than it was created in six 'earth' days as stated in Genesis. As this literal Biblical account contradicts the wealth of information and evidence that supports a universe of 13 billion years old and the formation of life by evolution, some scientists label Christians as crackpots believing nonsense in Genesis.

Yet, science isn't as objective or infallible as some (like Dawkins) would have you believe.

When I was in research (thankfully salaried by a company) I was well familiar with others who were beholden to research grants to maintain their lifestyle and employment. And also familiar with some who were tempted to skew results to prove a particular point or another to the benefit of their benefactor. The layman can see the fruits of this when the media states that 'scientists have shown' that something or other is bad for your health, when in a year or two's time the opposite is shown. So science is not the infallable, impartial discipline that some claim it is. It should be, if all research were undertaken impartially, but it isn't.

Secondly, we must look at the religious point of view, and, specifically, Christianity. There are some Christians who insist on the literal interpretation of Genesis, flying in the face of all evidence to the contrary. Creationists like this often do more harm to Christianity than good, as any rational human can see that the literal interpretation of Genesis is untenable, and therefore brand, as a result, all Christians as deluded crackpots. Sadly Creationists do not appreciate that Genesis was written in the original Hebrew as an allegorical poem and was never, not even in Biblical times, expected to be taken literally. Yes, there are great truths in Genesis, and it is still God-inspired, but it is not and was never a literal account of how the world came to be. Paul only mentions Adam and Eve in passing, and then only allegorically. Jesus doesn't mention Genesis, nor Adam and Eve at all.

Even more sadly, there are some so-called Christians who piously insist that unless one believes The Bible literally (and usually the King James version only) then one cannot be a 'proper' Christian, and judge others as not true Christians, heretics or worse. Rather than regard the Bible as a god, the majority of Christians put the Bible in its rightful place; as a God-inspired tool that points us in the direction of Christ so that Christ is central in the Christian's life and not words in a book, nor arguing over minutiae of chapter and verse.

So, if science is to be true to itself, and Christianity is to be central to one's life, there is little, if any, conflict between them. Science explains admirably how the universe came to be, and how the laws of nature, placed into the universe at the moment of Creation, continue to maintain that universe and to ensure that life not only exists but flourishes. Moreover, modern science, and especially modern theories like the Anthropic Principle, point to the extreme likelihood of design rather than chance in the creation of the universe. And if design, then a designer.

Religion, and specifically Christianity, on the other hand, explains why the universe should bother to exist in the first place - as an act of unconditional and supreme love of a Creator for his creation.

And these two complement each other admirably rather than conflict.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

14y ago

Science thinks that religion is largely made of superstition. Religion thinks science is way too unconventional. But it really depends on maintaining a balance. Many scientists practice a religion! Science is based on the scientific method (see what happens, state why you think it happens, test it and adjust your original assumption to fit) while religions typically take the teachings of a person from long ago and promote this as the only truth. Because of the nature of science it has proven many once-universally accepted "truths" to be completely false; because of the conservative outlook (and the biased teachings of their senior members) of many religions some of their adherents believe science to be either evil or corrupted by heretics and agents of evil. In short, by their very natures they will be at conflict, and this is amplified by the stubborn refusal of all people to accept when they are wrong.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago

They are not, although their adherents sometimes are! 'Science' is the elimination of falsehood by means of the scientific method; thus, it never claims to have 'the truth' - science starts with an hypothesis (an idea which conforms to observation, but which can be tested and possibly demonstrated to be false, or inadequate) and which, by repeated experiment, may one day reach its highest validation; the Theory (something which has a great deal to confirm it, and no experimental contradiction). From then on, it might be tweaked a bit to incorporate later discoveries, but almost impossibly unlikely to be abandoned.

Those who are religious must be forced to agree that, if their religion is the highest form of truth, no experimental evidence will contradict it. But it is all too true that the explanatory stories of our origins, nature and destiny - what might be called the ur-hypothesis of a particular religion - has been elevated, without examination, to the status of unquestionable truth. Similarly, I have heard more that one scientist say, 'It used to be THOUGHT that...(whatever)... but now we KNOW that...(new, improved 'whatever')'. No, we know no such thing. We are nearer, but it's only a better idea; next week, another scientist may upset the whole idea.

If such a thing as Truth there be, I think it has three levels;

1. a synthesis of our understanding about the way the world works, what actually happened/ is happening/ will happen, etc. - the realms of Science, History, Psychology, etc. Subject to the scientific method. There may be an 'absolute truth' out there, but we won't ever be sure that there isn't one last tweak that we haven't found yet.

2. Personal truth; how we relate as individuals to the world as described above. Subject to change and development, as it is dependent on the strengths and weaknesses of the individual, the time, place, where it applied, etc., but can only be validated by the individual.

3. Transcendent, ultimate truth. Some mystics/spiritual leaders have claimed to have reached this form of truth, and their nature, transformed by this experience, led many to believe them. Unfortunately, they could only express it in terms of the above two types of truth. This means that well-meaning instructions on, for example, healthy living (absolutely valid in the time/place they were expressed) are adopted by later generations as unchanging, infallible expressions of the will of the deity. What should have been liberating becomes a prison, through inability to question and experiment. At this point, Science and Religion part company.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

11y ago
A:The leaders of most religions are sensible enough not to challenge scientific knowledge. The Dalai Lama has said that if science decides on a theory that conflicts with Buddhism, then Buddhism must change. However, Judaism and Christianity, to a lesser extent Islam, sometimes insist on beliefs that do not go hand in hand with science.

The main concern is with creation. Stephen Jay Gould proposed the concept of Nonoverlapping Magisteria (NOMA). He said that the domain or magisterium for science is the empirical realm - what the universe is made from and why it works the way it does. He said that the magisterium of religion includes the ultimate meaning and moral values. These magisteria are nonoverlapping - science does not comment on the ultimate meaning of life, while religion should not comment on the natural world. On this view, science and religion can happily coexist.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago

no not really because religion is your beliefs and your culture unlike science were it has to have proof and a theory.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

14y ago

Science is proven

This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: Are science and religion in conflict with one another?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Related questions

What are some popular books one can purchase which delve into the relationship between Science and Religion?

There are many books that delve into the relationship between science and religion; however, many of these books have a bias towards science or a bias towards religion. Some books that delve into the relationship between science and religion are "Science and Christianity: Conflict or Coherence?" by Henry F. Schaefer III and "Rock of Ages: Science and Religion in the Fullness of Life" by Stephen Jay Gould.


What type of conflict is illustrated by this scenario A man questions his religious teachings and seeks the meaning of life?

People are not in conflict with ideas, they are in conflict with other people who have opposing ideas. Religious conflict in particular is usually characterized by one religion conflicting with another religion, rather than by man vs. religion. Although there are atheists who oppose the idea of religion in general. That has generally been an intellectual debate, rather than a conflict.


Is religion the cause of the conflict in the middle east?

Religion is just one of the causes.


Why did the conflict between Jews and Mulims start?

Because religion fosters war and conflicts. There is no conflict between Jews and Muslims as such. There are conflicts that pit Jews and Muslims against one another, such the the Israeli-Arab and Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, there is no Holy War by either religion targeting the adherents of the other.


What are some arguments that science and religion do not conflict?

The main argument claiming that there is no conflict between science and religion is basically that God is a scientist, or at least works with science... that he understands and uses the forces of the universe to do what he does. As it has been throughout Earth's history, what looks like magic to one group is actually the technology of the other. If God knows everything, which is part of the definition of God, then what he does looks impossible and miraculous to us, but it is explainable once we get to a sufficient level to understand it.


How does one get a worldview?

through religion and science.


What is the definition of Heuristic Relevance?

The belief that science and religion may suggest fruitful analogies for one another in method or even content.


What is the one thing with no science?

Religion tends to avoid science whenever possible.


What is one thing in the world that has nothing to do with science?

Religion


Are there Scientific proofs in religions?

== == Religion is all about faith, whilst science is a branch of overall knowledge for mankind. Religion is about belief whilst science emphasises more on knowledge-seeking. However religion is something that cannot be proven - right or wrong and true of false. Religion & Science at times may not be compatible or can run parallel to one another. Just as science cannot prove religion, it goes without saying religion cannot empirically prove anything on science. However, for believers science is part of religion, and NOT vice versa. ---- Thus, there is no way to prove the truth of any religion scientifically. All religions are equally based on faith alone, and which one you choose to follow, if you choose to follow a religion at all, is simply a matter of faith. Religion is the source of all knowledge of the world. Religion is for our spiritual ascension while science is for our physical ascension in this world. Both the disciplines are necessary for the successful physical as well as eternal life. Both are distinct in themselves and hence cannot be compared at any instance. Science cannot reach the spiritual zenith of religion and Religion cannot bow down to the levels to justify the theories of Science. "RELIGION BEGINS WHERE OUR INTELLECT ENDS". The things for which we could reason out automatically becomes 'science' for us. And the things which are beyond the reach of our intellect and power of reasoning automatically becomes 'religion' for us. Science is the vast ground and Religion is the unending sky. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


What are four belief system?

One example of a belief system is religion. Certain religions believe certain things. Also, science is another example of a belief system.


What is it called when you change from one religion to the Catholic religion?

Changing from one religion to another is called the same for any of them: conversion.