Science vs. Religion
The fierce debate between using faith versus scientific evidence to understand the world has been around for centuries. Although the discourse normally arises whenever a discussion of creation versus evolution comes to surface, religious versus scientific worldviews extend beyond the origin of humanity. Science coexists and competes for recognition with faith, which once dominated intellectual spheres as the plausible explanation of everything in life. While religion used to reign supreme in almost all spheres of life, it has lost pre-eminence as it does not pursue discoveries, nor shed obsolete concepts. Science, on the other hand, continues to push humanity to new heights by embracing new knowledge, making discoveries by the day, and abandoning old inadequate ideologies.
Religion primarily attempts to offer an explanation for life regarding God as the Supreme Being and his actions as the creator and overall authority of human behavior (Neese, 2001). Most religions recognize the existence of God, and creation account as the only explanation for the existence of the world. Religion promotes its doctrines in the context of ideal morality, which stems from God, with the promise of reward for those that believe. Unlike science, traditional religion does not enjoy the backing of evidence. Therefore, exist no independent investigators to confirm the primacy of the belief system other than truth and right being based solely on tradition (Neese, 2001). Science, according to traditional religion is materialistic, quantitative, and mechanistic (Fish, 2010). Although science often downplays the role of religion in the age of fast-moving world, it is worth noting that religion still offers the some of the most profound ethical principles. For instance, the biblical teaching that, “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” carries with it reach wisdom that traverses the science versus religion discourse.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Religion and its broader belief system stem from a universal school of thought. Humans are intrinsically sensitive to signs of agency, which makes followers of the creationist account seek biblical explanation when they encounter complex situations. This belief system makes the creationist theory more popular than the evolutionary theory among religious followers. Pro-religion critics argue that science needs religion. They claim that religion; particularly Christianity is the basis for the rules of logic and the order of nature. Taking a religious worldview means subscribing to a set of beliefs that are then evaluated in light of evidence that supports or discredit them (BBC, 2011). Magic, which is primarily a religious practice, views the world as an extension of the human mind. Myths, on the other hand, are leftovers of humanity as it progresses toward a scientific age, but they tell humans a lot about them that science cannot capture. In the same way one does not have to believe in a scientific theory to use it, one does not have to believe a religious account to give meaning to their life (BBC, 2011). Unlike scientific theories, religions myths cannot be subjected to experiments and verification, but they are accepted as reflecting human experience. Additionally, some religious myths are more truthful and believable than the stories coined by science.
Science, unlike religion, has gained acceptance by a practical demonstration of results. This contrasts sharply with most religions, which do not rely on evidence to gain followers (Neese, 2001). Pre-eminence of science lies in its dependence upon established standards of verification and confirmation that allows one consider available evidence without being tied down to a preconceived point of view. Science attempts to reach new heights by the day, and the scientific discoveries give humans the ability to visualize the world in a way that religion cannot. The diversity of science, perhaps has established it as offering a plausible explanation for everyday occurrences. The static nature of religion, on the other hand, as dictated by God’s direction of human behavior makes its explanation less appealing. Religion holds its ideas come from God, but it fails to back it up with verifiable evidence that would make this very premise universally acceptable.
Scientific disciplines like physics find the account of God as the origin to contradict its own the Big Bang account. The religious view that attributes Big Bang to God raises more questions than answers to the origin of God (Fish, 2010). For the psychologist, on the other hand, religious beliefs are viewed as interesting phenomena as opposed to informing believers of a new reality. Extraordinary claims generally demand extraordinary evidence, and considering religion has not come close to offering any evidence to back its belief system; scientists find it difficult to follow its premise. In being followers of scientific theories, humans can leap beyond the belief system of having ideas forced on them. Science, like religion, is a human invention, which renders it susceptible to misuse (BBC, 2011). Scientific fanatics who believe that religion is misguided in teaching followers that, humans shall rise from the dead as equally misguided in their belief that science will save the world.
It is evident that unlike religion, which is primarily static, science continues to evolve by seeking new and more informed explanations of the universe. Before the discovery of the scientific method, religion reigned supreme, as it was the basis of understanding and accounting for the complexities of life. However, with the advent of the scientific method, its dominance was challenged, and as long as it religion fails to forge new ways of accounting for the complexities of life, science will continue to amass more followers. The question, therefore, is whether religion will rise to the challenge and embrace the ideas that science has developed.
References
BBC. (September 2011). A point of view: Can religion tell us more than science?
Retrieved January 30, 2017 <from http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-14944470>.
Fish, J. M. (2010). It's bigger than you may think: broadening the
science vs. Religion debate. The Humanist , 70(4), 27.
Neese, L. H. (July 2001). Science vs. Religion: The challenge of interpretation. USA:
Today Magazine .
