Do you think there's a fundamental conflict between religion and science?

Question

The Newtonian worldview is dead, and quantum mechanics has opened a door to the soul in the foundations of the material world. Likewise traditional religion is dead (or dying), and the critique of the Enlightenment has led to reformulations of traditional faith which are wholly compatible with science. If truth is one, then surely whether we come at it through science or religion, we'll reach the same place in the end.

Perhaps dogmatic religion and dogmatic mechanistic science both need to be rejected.

Answer 1

I agree with most of what you said, and I do think there is a fundamental conflict concerning the (ideally) objective reasoning of science and the dogmatic authority of religion.

Many Religions have assumptions not based in physical reality.
- Were written long ago (once, not to be changed)
- Have to be interpreted by contemporary theologians who might miss ancient meanings

Science has its assumptions too:
- Nature is orderly and consistent
- All phenomena have natural causes
- We can know nature objectively

Scientists can be flawed, but the process of science ultimately corrects itself, and further, it works (we all must follow basic science principles everyday).

Change is more difficult for dogma,especially when considering its source, God, or gods, who are believed to be infallible (and we are not required to follow religious principles to led normal lives)

Science is based on evidence; religion, not so much. As Martin Luther said (and many fundamentalists apparently agree) - "Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has"

Who knows if this schism can be satisfactorily worked out for both parties in the near future, but our planet might depend on it.

Answer 2

There will always be a conflict as long as science does not acknowedge the "supernatural" or "invisible." Humans live in a finite environment. Science depends on observation, interpretation of data, and logical conclusions based on probability. I don't know if they've found it yet, but ask a science professor if (thinking about the Big Bang) they've figured out how the universe went from cooling off into the stage they call baryogenesis. Or ask a genetics professor in what ways genetics is incompatible with many evolutionary thoughts. Creationists, such as myself, believe that the creation is an event that began with a purpose, that man and woman were created for a purpose, and there is a purpose we are here now moving through time to a certain end. God is invisible. He created a visible world so that we might see that which we could not otherwise come to understand. I am not going to recant by belief and I daresay science, in general, will not recant theirs. Truth as defined by science is always subject to change based on new discoveries. It is not one truth nor ever can be. When Jesus came He came as the Truth. But that won't mean anything to people who refuse study what that means.

Answer 3

With Darwinism and Christianity there is a fundamental conflict. Lately science has been proving the validity of the Holy Bible with theories like "Big Bang Theory."

"The big bang theory is the theory that the universe started from a single point, and has been expanding ever since.
This has been well-established by observations, such as the apparent movement of galaxies away from us, and the cosmic microwave background radiation believed to be the leftover light from the big bang.

The evidence for a big bang having taken place about 15 to 20 billion years ago is overwhelming, so I naturally believe that it is the case.

However, if your real question is "why did the big bang happen in the first place?" then that ceases to be an astronomical question, but a religious one.

Some astronomers, who are religious, argue that the big bang theory confirms the existence of God and the basic elements of the creation story as told in the Bible. First came light, then the heavens, then the Earth ... "

So depending on your belief you can have science elements have the two in harmony or in conflict with each other

Answer 4

No. Religion and science are the two great seekers of truth, and no genuine truth from either source can conflict with a genuine truth from the other source. Truth cannot conflict with truth. There is no conflict between evolutionary biology and biblical Christianity. There is of course conflict between known facts of science and some personal interpretations of certain Bible verses. However, that simply demonstrates the inability of some groups to accurately and validly interpret the Bible. Most Christians find no conflict between biblical truth and scientific truth.
.
.

Answer 5

Many religious texts make claims that can be evaluated empirically. These should be (and some have been) tested. What is of value will then be absorbed into science, and the rest can be ignored for what it is; wishful thinking and self deception.

And Quantum Physics implies nothing about a "soul". Their is no real agreement about whather that theory is (ontologically)discriptive of anything.

Answer 6

This is cut and paste from an answer I gave pangel, but I think it is appropriate to your question also.

===============

Pangel, I would agree that science and religion cannot go hand-in-hand. In fact, they are more like polar opposites. However, I feel this is often misinterpreted to mean that science and spirituality must conflict. This will take some time for me to explain but I will try.

Religion is very much about establishing a belief system and trying to interpret the world around the core beliefs. This is the exact opposite of what goes on in modern science. Science demands objectivity and (if it is true science) fears no answer. What this means is that science must never subscribe to a position that it is willing to hold in opposition to overwhelming counter evidence. In short, it must believe nothing. This is the exact opposite of religion where belief is crucial.

Spirituality, on the other hand, is the deep consideration of one's relationship with the universe (both seen and unseen). Science *does* have its limitations. Picture one circle lying just inside another circle. The inner circle represents those things with which sciencej concerns itself - those things which are mearsureable, observable and testable. Science can establish detail and solid opinions within that circle. But it can never travel beyond its edge.

In order for sceince and religion to go hand in hand, religion would have to be willing to confine itself to that outer region. It would have to be willing to allow the ciricle representing science to grow unhindered until the outer region was just a sliver. No relifion that I know of is willing to accept that role.

I view spirituality as a tool to merge both of these regions (the inner and the outer). It allows you to know what is knowable while being open to and exploring possibilities in the unknowable

Answer 7

No. In the Catholic faith, faith and reason go together like peas and carrots.

There is at least one papal speech which discusses the relationship between faith and reason and religion and science. If you are ambitious enough, it won't be too hard to find this speech.

Edit:
Here is the speech:

MEETING WITH THE REPRESENTATIVES OF SCIENCE
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/speeches/2006/september/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20060912_university-regensburg_en.html
.
.

Answer 8

The fundamental difference between religion and science is; Scenes is fact based and peer reviewed and corrected if needed. Religion if faith based [just belief don't ask questions] it is dogmatic and will not admit to wrongs, no matter the proof

Answer 9

"Dogmatic" science is contantly revising itself to take into account new discoveries. Religion does not.

Science claims no preeminence over religion. It is religion that tries to force science to conform to a Bronze age view of the world.

BTW If there was some scientific evidence to contradict scientific "dogma", science would adapt to it. As of today. or ever, there has been none. Religion is the one that runs to catch up. Heliocentrism for example.

Answer 10

Have a faith and have faith that technology is in contact on your religions genesis. i've got faith God created guy via evolution. i'm a deist, even although that's not simply by fact "technology" has led me removed from christianity. that's an entire diverse tale.