Can science and religion co-exist peacefully?

[Physics-Man]

Yes

No

[nightdrot]

It depends on what you mean by co-exist. Obviously they have existed in Western civilization, side-by-side, for centuries. There are tensions and some strands of religion have reacted not always well, to be reciprocated by a sort of dripping contempt from science, and thus neither showing themselves at their best.

However, in general, the truth is that each in its way compliments the other and that the dichotomy between the two is of fairly recent vintage. In fact, it is a premise of the Roman Catholic Church that faith and reason are ultimately compatible. That if man's reason were perfect and uncorrupted, faith and science would affirm each other.

Thus, to this day, Vatican City has one of the world's foremost astronomical observatories. A place engaged in understanding the way the universe works as a way to grasp more fully the complex nature of the God's creation.

To be sure, the RCC has had its bad moments with science. See also Galileo. However, believe it or not, that was because the Church believed that he was contradicting science. The mistake the Church made was a tool literal understanding of the compatibility of faith and reason.

The Church reasoned that because man was the center of God's creation that therefore - literally - the sun, the stars and the planets must ultimately as a PHYSICAL reality revolve around the Earth. Thus Galileo fell afoul of the Church to his great price, but ultimate vindication.

Ironically, the real split between faith and science came from an excess on the scientific side. The birth of the age of Reason - coming from the discoveries of the physical laws by Newton among others - seemed to refute the Biblical understanding of man and free will.

Science reasoned that if there are physical laws that these must also be binding on human conduct. In effect, there is no free will. The flaws in human society were the result of man mistakenly producing laws that contradicted natural rights and therefore created disharmony. Religion, it was reasoned, was among the sources of these mistaken laws - superstition divorced from abstract reason and disharmony and conflict follow.

Here then where the serious split between science and religion. Some in religion turned to fundamentalism. That the Bible was literally - word for word - true. That the discoveries of science were the product of a reason corrupted by Original Sin and thus not to be relied upon and were wrong.

From the science side, the most conspicuous example was Marxism. Science stripped man of the particularities that give man his identity - his culture, his ethnicity, his religion. Marx squared the circle by identifying "scientific principles rooted in economics and the imagined dialectic of History" that squared the circle. Hence the phrase "scientific socialism."

Of course, both sides have their problems. Fundamentalism can give you the Salem With Trials. Socialism the Gulag.

Still, overall, the history of the West - and I did not even get into Islam and other religions that have their own stories to tell - has been to understand the way the universe works to give sense to something that transcends the material world. In that, the West has been the story, not always peaceful to be sure as man is not perfect, of the co-existence of science and religion and on the whole, man has benefited from that not always easy relationship.

[nightdrot]

P. S. Sorry for all the type-o's. Yikes! If you need translation, just let me know.

[hellionthesagereborn]

Of course. The big bang theory was created by a physicist who also happened to be a catholic priest, the first scientist to document the human genome was religious as where many physcists who contributed to the field of quantum mechanics. Religion is not science and any one who tries to suggest that is intentionally misrepresenting it. Any one who claims that religion should be taken literally doesn't understand the purpose of religion (their is a reason why we have religious scholars and theologians, because we interpret the stories of religion to find meaning behind them. If they where meant to be taken literally we wouldn't need to study it or discuss its meanings as it would be plainly stated and understood).

That's why when you see "scientists" debate religion, they NEVER debate a theologian, they never try to argue against religion as a religion but always argue it as if it was a, to quote sam harris (the stupidest smart person I have seen), "failed science" because if they tried to debate it for what it is, a philosophy a way of living your life to maximize happiness and group cohesion and to instill morality, you can't really win against that (which is also why those same people (again like Harris), refuse to acknowledge the merits of religion (Sam Harris stated he wanted a system that would make people the most happy, I believe it was Jonathan Heidt who then pointed out that if that is the case he should be advocating that every one should be traditional, conservative, and religious then as that creates the happiest society and has been shown to create the best environment for people.)).

So yeah, wondering if they can coexist is like asking if art can coexist with philosophy, of course they can, they are no inherent contradictions and in many cases their are overlaps, so long as you don't take one too far or try to cut out the other you should have a synthesis not a competition (which is what science originally was in the form of Alchemy (the founding of science, it was meant to understand our world and by extension god but scientists have forgotten the spiritual aspect of humanity and have sterilized it into what it is now).

[Agape93]

Depends on the religion. Pentecostal and several denominations of evangelical Christians, Islam and most cults would count as a no.

[GoodGuyBreakingBad]

I'm not so sure. As soon as they come up with vaccine
for Coronavirus , you will hear Holy Rollers debate against it
saying that the vaccine is against peoples religion so this is
making me wonder can Science and Religion co-exist peacefully?

[ChiTown33]

It does with me. I follow the bible and whenever science conflicts with it i smile and realize science just hasn't caught up to the bible yet.
For example Edwin Hubble discovered the big bang theory about a 100 years ago.
Well it says in Genesis "God said "Let there be light". So God told us of the big bang long long before Hubble.

[OddBeMe]

It does currently only bc religionists cherry-pick which religious beliefs they have. Science has proved the earth is 4.5 billion years old, so the Creation story isn’t believed in by many people. As science grows it’s repertoire religions will get smaller. But it prob won’t disappear.

[JackSmy]

Definitely!! If 'religion' stops judging, and just LISTENS when science says we can work together! The Christian Creation in Genesis, can be juxtaposed, and totally coincide with the Christian beliefs, even the Fundamentalists, if we accept definitions and terms.

[hellionthesagereborn]

Your aware that "scientists" are constantly attacking religion right? Meanwhile the Vatican has held summits and confrences on xenobiology and use their own observatory for the SETI project (search for extraterrestrial intelligences). I'm not saying their are not fundamentalists (the minority of religious people) who don't try to dismiss science, but its largely scientists who dismiss religion by proclaiming its a "failed science"(like Dawkins, Harris, and others proclaim) and thus should be ignored despite the fact that religion is not in any way a science (its has more in common with philosophy then it does science) which is why we have theologians and religious scholars who debate the meaning of spirituality and religion (which wouldn't happen if it was something that was to be taken literally. We don't have scientists debating whether or not gravity exists or what it means on a spiritual level to humanity unlike with religion). The fact is religion has been far more accepting of science then science has of religion (Again, the militant atheists are predominantly scientists (who dismiss religious contributions to society and the sciences).

[JackSmy]

@hellionthesagereborn But are scientists actually "ATTACKING" religion, or is that just what religious people, maybe offended, upset, and feeling challenged about their FAITH, just perceive?
I AM A SCIENTIST, and I am saying that 'science' and 'religion' can coincide, and live together, if we choose words, decide on terms, and agree that there is no "ATTACKING" or attempt for either, to say the other is 'wrong'.
I can't speak for the myriad others, I am not 'attacking' any, and I believe that God created people, that are scientists, as well as the religious scholars, and that maybe at some time, He, in His Great Wisdom, foresaw a need to unite both 'Science' and 'Religion'.
Are you open to that, discussion, and starting that unification? Can the past be left in the past, and the mistakes and judgments of old, forgiven, and forgotten, for the benefit of all, going forward, to a better future?

[hellionthesagereborn]

Yes, they are literally attacking religion. Dawkins has outright stated religion is evil and so has Sam Harris. Sam Harris has suggested that religion is not only evil but responsible for all the wars in the world (completely inaccurate even if we ignore the fact that the crusades where politically motivated (an attempt to try and reunify the holy roman empire with the byzantine empire) we still get very few religious wars).

You have Atheists constantly attacking religion (and yes, it is atheists doing the attacking, the religious people from what I can see mind their own business for the most part but atheists are militant) and they point to atheist scientists as their inspiration.

You have Neil Degrass Tyson who gave an entire speech to an academy of scientists talking about how religion has held us back (by pointing to the middle east and showing how they where great mathmaticians and astronomers before the ottomans took over and pushed islam. Of course the problem with his speech as he well knew is that those philosophers, astronomers and mathmaticians from the middle east where all muslim BEFORE the ottomans came in and conquered them, something he intentionally left out in an attempt to suggest they where some how atheists before this point.

[hellionthesagereborn]

The whole idea he was pushing being that religion holds science back instead of being one of the greatest drivers for it (historically speaking)). So yeah, atheist scientists are absolutely attacking religion at every opportunity and ridiculing and insulting those who are religious, making up completely provably false claims (as I have pointed to two examples of), and then turn around and proclaim they are the ones being attacked even though they provably are not.

So again, yes it is the atheist scientists who are attacking religion not the other way around (I mean again, we have the catholic church using its own observatory for the search for alien life, holding summits and conventions on multiple scientific topics, they funded scientific research (scientists constantly misrepresent it of course (for instance the church was not against the heliocentric solar system. The reason why Galileo was imprisoned was because he said some things that sounded insulting to the pope, not just the most powerful man in Europe at the time but the man who quite literally paid him to do his research on the heliocentric universe and who paid him to write his book on it (only requesting that he provide both arguments so that the people could decide which was the theory that was the most logical theory instead of just misrepresenting the arguments).

[hellionthesagereborn]

Keep in mind that I am not only a very science minded person (and very much a student of logic (which is why these scientists I have mentioned anger me because their arguments are not just irrational but factually inaccurate as well, just purely ideologically driven rather then objectively driven), I'm also an agnostic, I have no stock in religion one way or the other I just don't like how people claim things that are patently false or that intentionally obfuscate the facts.

[JackSmy]

@hellionthesagereborn I am not them, and I understand that even some 'Scientists' can be horribly ignorant! I don't expect you to trust me, in any way, saying I am a 'scientist' but I also believe a lot of spiritual things, and do not believe, that Science and Religion cannot agree.
If you care, and want to, can we chat, privately, and just start with a clean slate, no judgments, and maybe find a way that we can all accept, and agree? Your choice, and I am open to that!

[hellionthesagereborn]

Oh I'm not suggesting you are. The issue is that their is this notion that its religion that is irrational and anti science but the data doesn't back this (as Mark Twain put it, "a lie gets half way across the world before the Truth can get its pants on"). I was merely pointing out that its "fairly" one sided (obviously your going to have fundamentalists opposing it but they are a minority within religious communities yet many atheist and atheist scientists act as if they are the majority and norm (hell Darwin was religious, the catholic church officially recognized evolution half a century ago (and unofficially far earlier) etc. etc.). I wasn't accusing, I was clarifying because again, their is a misconception that religion is unreasonable and bad and science is pure and perfect (which its not because its a tool and can be used properly or misused no different then religion can). Feel free to message me if you want, but like I said I was not accusing just clarifying. As for the discussion, I am willing to discuss anything (clearly I have a lot of time on my hands (I'm a procrastinator so naturally I waste my time on here instead of more fruitful persuits (but it keeps my mind busy). As for unification, I think we originally had it through alchemy (many people criticize it but they ignore the fact that they laid the foundation for science and did so for spiritual reasons). I don't personally believe in god (nor do I disbelieve, I just don't trust myself or others judgments (nothing personal), so I require a lot of proof before I make decisions and I don't think humanity has the capacity, at least at this moment, to answer that question (if we ever will be able to do so).

[monkeynutts]

With a New religion yes. A mixture of them all as anthropological study into man's fascination with the soul, spirituality, and creation. That could be something scientists could waste a few hours thinking about.

[October808]

So Universalism (like in Babylon 5).

[monkeynutts]

@October808 yep that might work.

[Sixgun77]

Of course! Several months ago I went to an Irish charities event, and when I got there a priest who was volunteering there was discussing that very point. He was arguing that science and religion are not incompatible.

[DanoMR98]

I believe they are completely contradictory, and logically incompatible, but yes they can peacefully coexist in a society.

[Joe_Barbaro]

Hardly. Religion consists of made up fairytales and its followers aren't allow to question them. On the other hand, the very essence of science is questioning and examining things. If there is some god and some higher forces, they and the knowledge about them can coexist with science, I do believe that. But religion in the form as we know it most certainly cannot

[chriscdi]

yes but in order for that to happen the peoples ignorance has to stop, from both sides of course

[bangyourhead]

Of course. Science explains the how, Religion the why.

[romain1985]

Religion is based on antiquated scientific beliefs.

[TwoToTooTutu2]

They can, but some people don't want them to.

[Plitty-Tank]

Yes. In many areas, they do.

[angryyhedge]

History says the opposite.