English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Science still has far to go in understanding the universe. Much of the ancient wisdom we once had has been lost in time, misunderstood, badly translated, or has turned into superstition and ritual.
Will science come to verify some of the eternal truths? Will religion ever recognise physically observed universal laws? Could the terms "science" and "religion" one day be insufficient for our understanding of, well, life the universe and everything?
Keep an open mind, please. I'm not suggesting that this could happen anytime soon...

2006-08-11 14:30:49 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

I see that "What's you favourite TV ad?" has got more answers than this one. What does that tell you?

2006-08-11 14:47:53 · update #1

I'm not thinking of Christianity, which has misinterpreted a lot of ancient knowledge.
But aspects of Buddhism and Hinduism seem fairly likely to concur with scientific thought at some point.

2006-08-11 15:21:58 · update #2

Thanks for all your answers, and the reading recommendations.
I think some of you aren't thinking forward enough. How much have science and spirituality changed in, say, the last 700 years? Now go forward another 700...

What prompted me to ask the question was looking again at a book I read some years ago, called "History of the Future: A Chronology", which collected ideas by eminent scientists and 'futurologists', and predicted what changes we might see over this millenium. It's a great read, if you can find it.

2006-08-13 07:20:28 · update #3

18 answers

Perhaps when scientists come up with the right lenses or device with which to photograph the human soul surviving the body's demise (and I mean uncontested devices accepted by the entire scientific community).

It's interesting that you believe that in ancient times there was wisdom that has been lost over time by superstitious additions or intentional omissions. I agree with that.

Regarding whether religion will ever recognise physically observed universal laws, well, only if it suits its purposes during the current political climate. Some churches just hate to lose their flock. (I said "some"! Not offending anyone!)

The word science originally derives from the Greek verb "istamai", meaning "I know very well" (hence "history")and then the Latin "scire". Perhaps the day will come when words may be redundant since we will be so evolved that we will "know" and "see" most things of the cosmos without explanation, through a collective consciousness, but until then, I think it's important that the scientific community and the church stop fighting and help each other attain a common objective, the betterment of human society.

2006-08-13 06:20:27 · answer #1 · answered by Mariaell 2 · 0 0

Some of the latest thinking in physics recently seems to me to read more like theology than science. Both scientific thinking and religious thought change all the time so I suppose it is possible that at some point in the future the two could converge. Personally, I'm an atheist and think science and religion should be mutually exclusive, but as you suggest we should, I try to keep an open mind.

2006-08-11 23:18:58 · answer #2 · answered by sleepyredlion 4 · 1 0

I hope not! There are lots of things in religion (and too many religions to shake a stick at) that contradict common sense and even scientific fact, if science was ever watered down to accept some beliefs rather than real hard facts then we might as well all become Catholics.

Proving religious beliefs with science, well wouldn't that then make them facts rather than beliefs? They would no longer be a part of religion but science. I don't think the two can ever really merge. If it was possible to prove that Jesus really did all those things, that Buddah really sits on a cloud, that there really were two gold plates burried under New York City (or where ever it was), there would be no need to believe, there would be no need to have faith, vicars and bishops would have no job and there would be no point in church - people would just accept God's existance as they accept the existance of their local corner shop.

2006-08-11 23:23:41 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I believe they actually diverged some while back .
In Europe and the middle east ,priests were those that explained the universe ,and they studied to that end . At various points there were splits ,so in a way they're different branches of the same cult, of 'Explainism'.
Also medicine was tied up with spirituality from early Medicine men .
In a way ,I do think they are all circling the same 'truths' ,but 'Explainism' ,may not be up to the job, in any of its forms.

2006-08-12 02:53:22 · answer #4 · answered by GreatEnlightened One 3 · 0 0

They might converge at one point, but our level of philosophical development as a species would have to advance pretty far from where we're at right now.

I'm talking thousands of years before this happens, assuming the human race survives that long.

2006-08-11 14:40:55 · answer #5 · answered by drumrb0y 5 · 0 0

Science and Christianity were once insperabe as they still are in Islam. The problem is though that two of the bedrocks of Science are objectivity and verification. At this point, I have yet to come across a set of beliefs which are non-subjective and subject verification.

This does not mean that they cannot learn from each other. It just means that they serve different purposes and therefore unlikely to become reacquainted.

2006-08-12 20:13:28 · answer #6 · answered by flexin4uk 2 · 0 0

No. Science is humanity's way of avoiding spirituality. Spirituality needs "faith", and science, by definition, can't allow for that.

If science ever starts moving away from this "fact" and "law" business, it will cease to be science as we know it, and start becoming something else.

2006-08-11 15:23:10 · answer #7 · answered by Bella 2 · 0 0

i have a head and a tail! i wonder which side religious science goes on... also, i don't think calling them 2 sides of the same coin is accurate enough, i would say they're like 2 different ways of looking at the same thing. ☯

2016-03-16 21:32:08 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

They will likely mesh a lot more well later on, but what they are, "science" and "religion", will probably also have evolve by then.

Try reading french philosopher Henri Bergsons' "Mind-Energy" or "Creative Evolution" (the last one, among other works, he got the nobel prize in 1928 for (or 29, I forget)). Gilles Deleuze has also written an excellent introduction/elaboration of Bergsons life work, called "Bergsonism".

2006-08-12 02:13:29 · answer #9 · answered by wereduck 2 · 0 0

if u read up on quantum physics, u will see that just that ---that science and spirituality can co-exist and might even be one and the same--- it's our understanding that is wrong.
i also agree that Buddhism and Hinduism years and years ago taught things about the universe that could be considered both spiritual and scientific, and is still totally relevant today...

2006-08-11 20:11:00 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers