Why is it that we can't replace Religion with Science?

Question

We've evolved sufficiently enough to know where astrology ends and astonomy starts. Where alchemy ends and chemistry starts. Religion automatically turns into Philosophy.
Why can't we see that all that happends on Earth is explained through Science.. not a God that we can't see, hear, or even imagine?

Answer 1

The reason is that it's in our genes, leftover from our primitive barbaric ancestors. Obsolete genes do not die overnite, so we'll be seeing a distorted worldview for some time to come.

Religion and the belief in a higher being springs forth from the primitive limbic system of your brain, the last remnants of your reptillion past. The area where our raw emotions reside, including the irrational belief systems.

The 'religious' experience is triggered by deep depression, starvation, near death, or other highly charged situations. The 'born-again' christian phenomena has a scientific basis....yes, your limbic system. Why has man evolved this mechanism you might ask? Simple...it was a survival mechanism of our cave man ancestors to cope with a hostile and unknown universe.

The cerebral cortex is a more recent development. Here is where our rational and logical thought processes take place. It is here that the atheists have found their basis in reality.

In reality, there is no sentient, omnipresent, omnipotent supernatural being or force....therefore all the inequities and misery of the world will always persist, no matter how hard some try to get that limbic brain of ours to work...sorry

Answer 2

That's actually a very good question because science today has come and disproven many held beliefs in religious texts and documents. It has basically made the Bible an unreliable source and pointed out all of its inaccuracies and contradictions. There are religions, though, that actually use science to prove the existence of God, or at least some sort of superior being. For example, Hinduism taps into Quantum Physics and Meta Physics to prove the existence of God. In fact, Meta Physics is so deep into science, physicians believe that it is inter weaved with religion, proving some sort of higher being. This universe itself proves the existence of a God in its basic rules. The most basic rule that we learn in pretty much every science class is that matter can not be created or destroyed. So if this world started off as nothing but empty space, how can there be planets and other such bodies right now. They have to have started at some point, proving that matter was created, in a way, proving the idea of a superior being.

Answer 3

Allow me to play Devil's advocate (so to speak).

I agree with you that a certain brand of naive religion is no longer tenable by educated people. The God with the white beard - to use somebody else's expression - is dead.

I, however, see no reason why our amazing technical and theoretical progress must lead us to the conclusion that metaphysics and tradition are worthless. First of all, we will never take all mystery out of the universe. Our knowledge is never complete and science, if anything, teaches us humility in the face of our limitations. Science confronts us with infinity at every turn.

Second, there are a series of questions which science, because of its mission, does not touch. What is the true nature of consciousness? What is the right thing to do? Is human life valuable? More so than animal life? Why is there something instead of nothing? If there was a beginning to time, how did time ever come to begin, is there a fraction of a second before time in which the conditions of time were created? If not, how did we ever get here - how can an infinity of time precede us? Etc..., Etc..., Etc...

And although science does not answer these metaphysical and ethical questions, men need to know these answers. I know Kantians will tell me the philosopher should choose the more practical response, but that is no answer for a normally-constituted person. Most people would rather leave these things open than simply admit to themselves: They prefer to believe this, because it's practical, and rightly so. Seriously, what kind of an answer is that?

So that in spite of all our knowledge, the mysteries of our existence remain fully in our presence. Some of us choose to believe there's more than meets the eye for that very reason. It would be wrong to be tyrannical about such a belief, but it would be equally wrong to try to force the absence of such a belief on others.

Answer 4

Religion does not automatically turn into philosophy. That is the main problem. In order for something to become a philosophy, one actually has to think about it. It requires actual effort on a person's part.

Religion is the opposite, "knowing" something without thinking or questioning. If every bible today was replaced with a textbook on logic, and all knowledge of all religions was lost, it would start again the first time the first lazy person read something in that textbook and believed it just because it said so. From there the cancer would quickly spread. It would probably take the form of cults like the Pythagoreans instead of montheistic religions, but it would be just as bad with reason taken out of the equation.

Answer 5

The range of insight and ingnorance on this subject is remarkable.
First and foremost, at this current point in human history we can neither prove the existence or non-existence of God. Analogies like "you can't see air so you can't prove its existence", are ridiculous. Sight is only one sense, are you telling me that you can't feel the wind? Clearly all things that are physical are detectable by our senses, even if sometimes we need special tools or instruments. If you believe in God, then you believe because you have faith and for no other reason. There is no proof of the existence of any supernatural phenomena. Scientists accept that nothing is certain, but have to make logical assumptions based on what we loosely term the "Scientific Method." Despite what some on this forum believe, there is no faith involved in science. However, many scientific theories are based on a preponderance of evidence accumulated through repeatable experiment and observation.
Faith requires no evidence whatsoever and is essentially irrational. Is this wrong? The Psychologist and philosopher William James said that any belief that has a net benefit to the believer is valid, without proof. So ultimately this a personal decision that one makes to cope with the difficulties of life.
It is entirely feasible that some elements of religious belief may be instinctual, or "hard wired" as someone else has said.
Others have said that non religious people are narrow minded. I would beg to differ. It is the very width of their mind that makes their non belief possible. Historically, most societies have put immense pressure on people to believe in the accepted religion of the time / location. Non-conformance in the middle ages may have lead you to be burned at the stake or tortured into submission. Currently at this juncture in history, jihadists would subject any non believer to similar treatment.
One person stated in their response to this question that they found Christian "evidence" compelling. They are mistaken. There is no evidence that would stand up to scientific scrutiny and no, purely our existence does not prove the existence of God, any more than it proves the existence of the "flying sphagetti monster" or Russell's orbital tea pot.
Someone else said that religion gives you hope of an afterlife. Well that's nice if it complies with James Maxim, but you can't be sure that such a thing exists as no-one yet has communicated across the void to tell us.
The debate will continue and it is worthwhile because it leads us to examine ourselves as fellow humans. Philosophy continues to develop in the light of humanities' ever changing knowledge base. It is likely that the "big questions" will always be unknowable, but what is important is that we can create a credo adaptable to each person's need and the freedom to accept that we may never all agree.

Answer 6

I suggest you actually learn enough about science before making such blanket statements.

All of science is simply theories, not truths, not absolutes. Each theory has at is foundation at least one assumption which the rest of it is built up around. Therefore, one does not KNOW anything through science but BELIEVES them. Faith is required for science as it is required for religion.

And I'm not a religious fanatic, if that's what you believe. I've actually studied the sciences and have an IQ of around 200 with regards to them and mathematics.

Additional: People who say that scientific theories are at least tangible evidence either do not understand or do not acknowledge that observation and existence itself are an assumption. It is assumed the observer exists, as it is assumed that anything exists as the observer observes it to be. It is also assumed that other observers exist and that they observe in the same fashion as the observer. All of these are assumptions that the scientific community takes as a given when creating other theories and has for centuries on end. This is why the Matrix was so popular when it came out, because it called into question these basic assumptions which were and had ever been at the foundation of our science.

All science is faith and it is no more tangible than any religious belief. Science itself can be called a religion because of this.

Answer 7

We cannot replace Religion with Science because they are not interchangeable despite many people thinking they are. Science can be tested; is objective and verifiable. Religion is subjecting, cannot be tested and verifiable only through faith, an emotion. Patriotism is another example of a strong emotion of a similar type but not as pronounced as religious faith. Science may answer: what we are; how we got here; where we are; and even when we are (with more advances), but religion answers who we are and why we are--two questiosn that science may not ever be able answer.
For example, religously speaking, we are Jews--the chosen people of God We were born of God's love and creation and must keep the covenant with him. Science cannot answer those questions. Science can say we evolved over several million years along with apes, etc. from a common ancestor. We are in a Western spiral arm of the Milky way galaxy orbiting the Sun, etc. The discplines answer different questions (or the same questions in a different way). Also religion, because it answers who we are and why we are here, has a profound emotional attachment to people. Religion is often their ultimate concern--that which orders all other concerns or thoughts. Science, is cold,dark lonely and full of atoms, quarks, etc.

Answer 8

Science and religion cover two different aspects of a real life.

At this time science provides answers to the reality of the world. In prior times religion and philosophy performed this function.

Have religion and philosophy changed? Not really. Human knowledge has been developed to the point that the scientific method can produce scientific answers.

Science cannot explain religion and philosophy because they are outside the "realm" of science.

If you hypothesize that religion and God exist - then no scientific method experiment can be conducted where there is a "control" of "no God".

The fact that humans could not detect radio waves, and gamma rays, and neutrons, for thousands of years does not mean that these things did not exist then.

The fact that you cannot see a God or imagine him does not disprove Him - even using the scientific method.

You choose to believe or not believe. Both choices are matters of faith.

Answer 9

Astrology does not have anything to do with astronomy. One is a secular belief while the other is a documented science. We, Christians, cannot replace religion with science because there are miracles & wonders that science cannot explain. Everything that happens on Earth cannot be explained through science. Browse through the Bible and explain the miracoulus events by a scientific resolution. Apparantely you are not a Christian. Faith in the Bible relinquishes the desire to seek science. These are not folk tales from 3000 years ago. We can see God in many things. God does speak to His people. People have seen His angels & He can be imagined. There is scientific proof Jesus walked this earth.

Answer 10

People this world and everything you have ever held to be real is not. This world is an illusion. I know from first had experience. Science is limited to this illusion so it can't even begin to measure true reality. What people are talking about when they say god, does exist AND it is MORE real than you hand.

You want to know the secret of life. This isn't a three dimensional world. It's a two dimensional shifting image that creates the illusion of a three dimensional world. You don't live in this world you look at it.