Would it be nice if there is a reconcilitation between science and religion?

Question

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Have a great day!

Answer 1

The concepts themselves aren't as mutually exclusive as the polarized extremists make them out to be. It's the people that need to reconcile their small-minded, silly differences; only the extremists seem to paint up a huge, unbridgeable gap between science and religion. The fact of the matter is that there are many scientists who believe in god, and many religious people who can think logically.
But yes, it would be nice if all of the loud mouths stopped yelling their opinions at each other and got a life.

Answer 2

Yes. If Science can come to the understanding that Greed is both a belief and a God in a way and this should be discussed as wellGreed is what many worshipp and can be the cause of Genocide without proper restraints. If scientists were to talk about the possibility of separating it from politics by making it a religion with the law those who worshipp it can do so though use of National Armies or any other kind will be illegal.Same with Police.Same constraints Christanity has been place under.

Answer 3

There can be. Some would say there is no essential conflict because they pursue different kinds of truth. I would say that opinions resulting from the scientific method are allegorical - they have a moral. For instance, the vastness of the Universe encourages humility, and the scarcity of life in our part of the Universe reminds us of the preciousness of our planet. This is the way forward. In mediaeval times, people interpreted the world allegorically. For instance, they would look at a red rose and say the colour of the petals symbolised the blood of Christ and the thorns represented the nails in his hands on the Cross. In those days, natural philosophy, which became science, was in harmony with religion, and it was only later that a split appeared. They can be brought back together by learning lessons from scientific theories. However, this is not the same as seeing science as a religion. Here's an illustration: Gnosticism sees matter as evil, but i see it as good because it encourages concern with people's physical needs rather than living for another life which may never happen. This is based on scientific opinion but science itself does not suggest matter is either good or evil.

There need be no conflict.

Answer 4

There IS a reconciliation between science and religion... it's called Vedic Science.

It's a very ancient system that accepts direct inner cognition as a valid component of Science. I think we will see the return of this kind of thing in the future, since western science is at that point right now where they need to leap into a more abstract realm.

That was a very nice question. Good thinking and very timely too.

Answer 5

The concepts themselves aren't as mutually exclusive as the polarized extremists make them out to be. It's the people that need to reconcile their small-minded, silly differences; only the extremists seem to paint up a huge, unbridgeable gap between science and religion. The fact of the matter is that there are many scientists who believe in god, and many religious people who can think logically.
But yes, it would be nice if all of the loud mouths stopped yelling their opinions at each other and got a life.

Answer 6

Actually there is a branch called Spiritual Sciences made famous by Rudolf Steiner.

You see, only 5 percent of the world's population or 1 in 20 people in the world have second sight. These people straddle themselves in two worlds, and use their spiritual preception to learn how it all works. Steiner used his ability to scientifically understand the spiritual.

Remember that how we preceive reality is really dependent on your own senses. Thus your version of reality is really very different from that of other people unless they have similar abilities.

Modern science relies too heavily on machines to measure and meter "reality". So unless they can come out with a machine to measure God, they will probably say that this God dude doens't exist.

If we stop relying on machines to "proof" a spiritual existence, then and only then can be have a true reconciliation of science and religion.

Answer 7

There is. Anything useful in religion is experiential, and thus suited to empirical enquiry. Anything in religion that does not meet the scrutiny of science should be discarded. Now, I'm using the word "science" in quite a broad sense, since I think there are writings from certain traditions (especially several Indian traditions) that overcome the limitations of objectivity while still being rigorous.

Answer 8

Nice yes, but not very useful for terrorists or politicians who want to use God as an excuse to bomb their enemies, or argue their ideas are better because God said so.

---------------

Science and Religion to fuse together if you study Cosmology or look too closely at the ultimate causes of things. I am not talking just about Ken Ham and his loony friends who still promote the & day zap theory.

Respected scientists like Lee Smolin of Loop Gravity fame, seem to believe the universe is alive or human minds seem to have a magical influence on their own personal realities.

If the whole universe (or multiverse) is a living organism with thoughts and feelings much like our own but with immensely vast intelligence, we might consider such a creature worthy of the description: "god".

Answer 9

Some progress with http://www.tiller.org http://www.integralscience.org http://www.quantumbrain.org http://www.divinecosmos.com http://www.noetic.org

"Psychoenergetic Science," Tiller,
"Extraordinary Knowing," Mayer
"The Field," McTaggart
and other such are finding psi/biofield/soulfield effectivity operating at the quantum level. Such work is correlatiing meditation intention ("soul") with reliable effects and even information-sensing and -gathering. This level of being is correlated with Soul-individuation by some practitioners ("Climb the Highest Mountain" and "The Masters and Their Retreats," "Men in White Apparel" and "Watch Your Dreams," Ann Ree Colton, "Light Is a Living Spirit" and "Man's Subtle Bodies and Centres").

Some of the "reactionaries" include reductionist "neurophilosophers" and literalist religious.

However, it is a major change, albeit at the beginning, from the 500 years of Cartesian division between science and religion.

kind regards,

j.

p.s. The occasional scientist guests on http://www.coasttocoastam.com radio (click on "Affiliates" button for local station).

Answer 10

They can not be because they are controlled by opposite
parts of mind.

"Our two minds .... One is an act of the emotional
mind, the other of the rational mind. In a very
real sense we have two minds, one that thinks and
one that feels" (Daniel Goleman, Emotional
Intelligence, Bloomsbury Publishing, London, 1996,
page 8). This rational mind is also called the
faculty of logic and reason.

The Upanishads say that these two are opposite in
nature. Modern psychologist also have observed it,
but they are not very sure about it:

"At the same time, reason sometimes clearly seems
to come into conflict with some desires (even
while not being in conflict with others) giving us
the impression that reason is separate from
emotion".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reason

The emotional mind is connected with religion and
the rational mind is connected with science.
The Upanishads say that these are the opposite
polarities of same energy. In science terminology,
they are like two poles of a magnet - the existence of
one is necessary for the existence of the other.
But they are not water-tight compartments. A person
who likes atheism when young may become a theist in his
later years. Since the very percentage of atheists is
small, the majority need not bother about them.

"The percentage of atheists in the world is less
than 5%"

http://www.positiveatheism.org/india/s1990c48a.htm

"Atheists are all scientists" ?

http://www.non-religious.com/statistics.html