Science and Religion Science and Religion Science and religion Science and religion

Science and Science and ReligionReligion

Science and religionScience and religion




Science and ReligionScience and Religion

What is Religion?What is Religion?

What is Science?What is Science?


The word religion derives from the Latin word The word religion derives from the Latin word to bind or to ligate (tie).to bind or to ligate (tie).

It means bind to the gods It means bind to the gods


The word science comes from the Latin word The word science comes from the Latin word for knowledgefor knowledge

It occurs in the word consciousIt occurs in the word conscious


Religion is a belief in somethingReligion is a belief in something The belief is not necessarily substantiated by The belief is not necessarily substantiated by

physical or material evidencephysical or material evidence Religious knowledge obtained through holy Religious knowledge obtained through holy

writings, authority, revelations and religious writings, authority, revelations and religious experiencesexperiences

Religionists have faith or trust in such Religionists have faith or trust in such knowledge knowledge


Religious knowledge is qualitative not Religious knowledge is qualitative not quantitative.quantitative.

Religious knowledge is not gotten through Religious knowledge is not gotten through measurement measurement

In religion knowledge is taken as either true or In religion knowledge is taken as either true or false. false.

Religious knowledge is neither progressive, Religious knowledge is neither progressive, nor tentative. nor tentative.


Scientific knowledge is a relationship between Scientific knowledge is a relationship between observationsobservations

The observations are subject to refinementThe observations are subject to refinement Scientific knowledge is progressive and Scientific knowledge is progressive and

tentativetentative Scientific knowledge is neither true nor false, Scientific knowledge is neither true nor false,

but rather consistent with the observations and but rather consistent with the observations and consistent with prior knowledgeconsistent with prior knowledge


Science formulates quantifiable questionsScience formulates quantifiable questions Science uses units, numbers, direction along Science uses units, numbers, direction along

with mathematics to express knowledgewith mathematics to express knowledge Numbers are quantitative.Numbers are quantitative. Units are not a quality. Units are dimensions Units are not a quality. Units are dimensions

representing time, energy, weight, volume, representing time, energy, weight, volume, length, brightness. Dimensions are length, brightness. Dimensions are independent variables independent variables

Assumptions of ScienceAssumptions of Science

The world is real. The world is real. The real world is knowable and The real world is knowable and

comprehensible. comprehensible. There are laws that govern the real world. There are laws that govern the real world. Those laws are knowable and comprehensible. Those laws are knowable and comprehensible. Those laws don't [radically] change according Those laws don't [radically] change according

to place or time, since the early stages of the to place or time, since the early stages of the big bangbig bang. .

Assumptions of ScienceAssumptions of Science

Nature is understandable Nature is understandable The rules of logic are valid The rules of logic are valid Language is adequate to describe the natural realm Language is adequate to describe the natural realm Human senses are reliable.Human senses are reliable. Mathematical rules are descriptive for the physical Mathematical rules are descriptive for the physical

worldworld

Basic Assumptions of ScienceBasic Assumptions of Science

Assumptions are accepted without proofAssumptions are accepted without proof

Form the basis of all scientific thinkingForm the basis of all scientific thinking

In other words, the basic assumptions of science are In other words, the basic assumptions of science are accepted on faith. Interesting.accepted on faith. Interesting.

Limitations of ScienceLimitations of Science

Science can't answer questions about value. For Science can't answer questions about value. For example, there is no scientific answer to the example, there is no scientific answer to the questions, "Which of these flowers is prettier?" or questions, "Which of these flowers is prettier?" or "which smells worse, a skunk or a skunk cabbage?" "which smells worse, a skunk or a skunk cabbage?" And of course, there's the more obvious example, And of course, there's the more obvious example, "Which is more valuable, one ounce of gold or one "Which is more valuable, one ounce of gold or one ounce of steel?" Our culture places value on the ounce of steel?" Our culture places value on the element gold, but if what you need is something to element gold, but if what you need is something to build a skyscraper with, gold, a very soft metal, is build a skyscraper with, gold, a very soft metal, is pretty useless. So there's no way to scientifically pretty useless. So there's no way to scientifically determine valuedetermine value..


Science can't answer questions of morality. The problem of Science can't answer questions of morality. The problem of deciding good and bad, right and wrong, is outside the deciding good and bad, right and wrong, is outside the determination of science. This is why expert scientific determination of science. This is why expert scientific witnesses can never help us solve the dispute over abortion: all witnesses can never help us solve the dispute over abortion: all a scientist can tell you is what is going on as a fetus develops; a scientist can tell you is what is going on as a fetus develops; the question of whether it is right or wrong to terminate those the question of whether it is right or wrong to terminate those events is determined by cultural and social rules--in other events is determined by cultural and social rules--in other words, morality. The science can't help here.words, morality. The science can't help here.


Science can't help us with questions about the Science can't help us with questions about the supernatural. The prefix "super" means "above." supernatural. The prefix "super" means "above." So supernatural means "above (or beyond) the So supernatural means "above (or beyond) the natural." The toolbox of a scientist contains only natural." The toolbox of a scientist contains only the natural laws of the universe; supernatural the natural laws of the universe; supernatural questions are outside their reach. questions are outside their reach.

A statement a scientist should not make (if he or she is well A statement a scientist should not make (if he or she is well trained and is not manipulating you):trained and is not manipulating you):

Evolution is true.Evolution is true. The Big Bang happened.The Big Bang happened.

Better statements:Better statements:

The theory of evolution is by far the best model we have to The theory of evolution is by far the best model we have to explain both the fossil evidence and the genetic evidence with explain both the fossil evidence and the genetic evidence with regard to the origin of all species.regard to the origin of all species.

The Big Bang model is in dramatic agreement will all known The Big Bang model is in dramatic agreement will all known facts about the origin and history of the universe.facts about the origin and history of the universe.

Science seeks consistency, not “truth.” What is the simplest Science seeks consistency, not “truth.” What is the simplest and most consistent explanation of the observation.and most consistent explanation of the observation.


Religion and science ask different kinds of Religion and science ask different kinds of questions and define words differentlyquestions and define words differently

Religion and science appear as if they were Religion and science appear as if they were two two incommensurateincommensurate paradigms addressing the paradigms addressing the identical information arenaidentical information arena

Questions science asks and attempts to answer:Questions science asks and attempts to answer: When, where, how many, why (by what means)When, where, how many, why (by what means) How does a living thing function?How does a living thing function? What are the fundamental forces?What are the fundamental forces?

Question religion asks and attempts to answer:Question religion asks and attempts to answer: Why am I here?Why am I here? Is that the right thing to do?Is that the right thing to do? How valuable am I?How valuable am I? Does God exist? Does God act (theism)?Does God exist? Does God act (theism)? Will that God respond if I pray?Will that God respond if I pray?

Questions both ask (but by different means)Questions both ask (but by different means) How and when did life originate?How and when did life originate? How and whendid the universe originate?How and whendid the universe originate?


Religion offers certaintyReligion offers certainty

Science is tentativeScience is tentativeShould I take vitamins? What’s the best birthing method? Should I take vitamins? What’s the best birthing method?

Is the Pritikan diet the best or is a vegan diet better?Is the Pritikan diet the best or is a vegan diet better?

Though science is tentative; it is also efficacious and Though science is tentative; it is also efficacious and progressiveprogressive

Unanswered questions which seem to Unanswered questions which seem to relate to sciencerelate to science

Consciousness (what is consciousness and why are we Consciousness (what is consciousness and why are we conscious?)conscious?)

Origins of life Origins of life

Origin of the universe. Why is there anything (as opposed Origin of the universe. Why is there anything (as opposed to nothing)to nothing)

Why is the universe comprehensible Why is the universe comprehensible to humans?to humans?

Torrance finds the universe's Torrance finds the universe's comprehensibility astonishing: “the fact that it comprehensibility astonishing: “the fact that it [the universe] is comprehensible at all to us is [the universe] is comprehensible at all to us is a miracle, indeed the most incomprehensible a miracle, indeed the most incomprehensible thing about it.” Torrance, thing about it.” Torrance, Reality and Reality and Scientific Theology, Scientific Theology, 53.53.

Unsolved Problem- LifeUnsolved Problem- Life

For nearly 50 years since the Miller and Urey For nearly 50 years since the Miller and Urey experiment which synthesized amino acids and experiment which synthesized amino acids and nucleoside in vitro the hope for the artificial nucleoside in vitro the hope for the artificial creation of life appears ever more distant than creation of life appears ever more distant than ever.ever.

KnowledgeKnowledge

Are there question asked by art or religion? Are there question asked by art or religion? Are those question understood by Science?Are those question understood by Science? Can science answer the questions asked by Can science answer the questions asked by

painting or religion?painting or religion? Can science decide which painting or which Can science decide which painting or which

musical score is great and which is dross?musical score is great and which is dross?

KnowledgeKnowledge Knowledge is a relationship between ideas about observations.Knowledge is a relationship between ideas about observations.

Are there other ways of knowing in addition to the ways of Are there other ways of knowing in addition to the ways of Science?Science?

Are painting, dance, music, religion other ways of knowing?Are painting, dance, music, religion other ways of knowing?

ScientismScientism

Scientism is the acceptance of scientific theory Scientism is the acceptance of scientific theory and scientific methods as applicable in all and scientific methods as applicable in all fields of inquiry about the world, including fields of inquiry about the world, including morality, ethics, art, and religionmorality, ethics, art, and religion

MaterialismMaterialism

““We exist as material beings in a material We exist as material beings in a material world, all of whose phenomena are the world, all of whose phenomena are the consequences of material relations among consequences of material relations among material entities." In a word, the public needs material entities." In a word, the public needs to accept materialism, which means that they to accept materialism, which means that they must put God in the trash can of history where must put God in the trash can of history where such myths belong.”such myths belong.”

Richard LewontinRichard Lewontin Retrospective essay on Carl Sagan in the January 9, 1997 Retrospective essay on Carl Sagan in the January 9, 1997 New York Review of New York Review of

BooksBooks,,

Scientific MaterialismScientific Materialism

Scientific Materialism accepts only one reality: the Scientific Materialism accepts only one reality: the physical universe, composed as it is of matter and physical universe, composed as it is of matter and energy. Everything that is not physical, energy. Everything that is not physical, measurable, or deducible from scientific measurable, or deducible from scientific observations, is considered unreal. observations, is considered unreal. LifeLife is is explained in purely mechanical terms, and explained in purely mechanical terms, and phenomena such as Mind and Consciousness are phenomena such as Mind and Consciousness are considered nothing but epiphenomena - curious considered nothing but epiphenomena - curious by-products, of certain complex physical by-products, of certain complex physical processes (such as brain metabolismprocesses (such as brain metabolism))

Scientific MaterialismScientific Materialism There is no There is no GodGod, , No angelsNo angels No DevilNo Devil No goodNo good No evilNo evil No survival of physical death, No survival of physical death, No non-physical realities, and No non-physical realities, and No ultimate meaning or purpose to lifeNo ultimate meaning or purpose to life No HeavenNo Heaven No afterlifeNo afterlife

Scientific MaterialismScientific Materialism

Only that which can be observed and Only that which can be observed and measured through the technique of measured through the technique of Scientific Scientific MethodMethod is real, and everything else is unreal. is real, and everything else is unreal.

The Religiousness of ScienceThe Religiousness of Science

““You will hardly find one among the You will hardly find one among the profounder sort of scientific minds profounder sort of scientific minds without a peculiar religious feeling of without a peculiar religious feeling of his own. But it is different from the his own. But it is different from the religion of the naive man. For the religion of the naive man. For the latter God is a being from whose care latter God is a being from whose care one hopes to benefit and whose one hopes to benefit and whose punishment one fears; a sublimation punishment one fears; a sublimation of a feeling similar to that of a child of a feeling similar to that of a child for its father, a being to whom one for its father, a being to whom one stands to some extent in a personal stands to some extent in a personal relation, however deeply it may be relation, however deeply it may be tinged with awe. But the scientist is tinged with awe. But the scientist is possessed by the sense of universal possessed by the sense of universal causation.”causation.”

Einstein's FaithEinstein's Faith

'Science without religion is lame, religion without 'Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.' So Einstein once wrote to explain his science is blind.' So Einstein once wrote to explain his personal creed: 'A religious person is devout in the sense personal creed: 'A religious person is devout in the sense that he has no doubt of the significance of those super-that he has no doubt of the significance of those super-personal objects and goals which neither require nor are personal objects and goals which neither require nor are capable of rational foundation.' capable of rational foundation.'

His was not a life of prayer and worship. Yet he lived by His was not a life of prayer and worship. Yet he lived by a deep faith--a faith not capabIe of rational foundation--a deep faith--a faith not capabIe of rational foundation--that there are laws of Nature to be discovered. His that there are laws of Nature to be discovered. His lifelong pursuit was to discover them. His realism and lifelong pursuit was to discover them. His realism and his optimism are illuminated by his remark: 'Subtle is the his optimism are illuminated by his remark: 'Subtle is the Lord, but malicious He is not' (Lord, but malicious He is not' ( 'Raffiniert ist der 'Raffiniert ist der Herrgott aber boshaft ist er nicht.'.'Herrgott aber boshaft ist er nicht.'.'). When asked by a ). When asked by a colleague what he meant by that, he replied: 'Nature colleague what he meant by that, he replied: 'Nature hides her secret because of her essential loftiness, but not hides her secret because of her essential loftiness, but not by means of ruse' (by means of ruse' ('Die Natur verbirgt ihr Geheimnis 'Die Natur verbirgt ihr Geheimnis durch die Erhabenheit ihres Wesens, aber nicht durch durch die Erhabenheit ihres Wesens, aber nicht durch List.'List.'). ).

Antony Flew Considers Antony Flew Considers God...Sort OfGod...Sort Of

Flew is increasingly persuaded Flew is increasingly persuaded that some sort of Deity brought that some sort of Deity brought about this universe, though it about this universe, though it does not intervene in human does not intervene in human affairs, nor does it provide any affairs, nor does it provide any postmortem salvation. He says postmortem salvation. He says he has in mind something like he has in mind something like the God of Aristotle, a distant, the God of Aristotle, a distant, impersonal "prime mover." It impersonal "prime mover." It might not even be conscious, might not even be conscious, but a mere force. In formal but a mere force. In formal terms, he regards the existence terms, he regards the existence of this minimal God as a of this minimal God as a hypothesis that, at present, is hypothesis that, at present, is perhaps the best explanation perhaps the best explanation for why a universe exists that for why a universe exists that can produce complex lifecan produce complex life

Chaos vs Cosmos

God vs the “gods”

The History of Science and Religion

Thomas Aquinas (1224-1274 )Thomas Aquinas (1224-1274 )

Roger BaconRoger Bacon

Bacon’s advice:

To study Natural Philosophy, use;

“External experience, aided by instruments, and made precise by mathematics.”

William of OckhamWilliam of Ockham

His philosophy of science:

“Nothing is assumed as evident unless it is known per se or is evident by experience, or is proved by authority of scripture.”

Nikolai Copernicus

“True assumptions must save the appearances.”

Galileo Galilei

“The Bible was written to tell us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go”

“In discussions of physical problems we ought to begin not from the authority of scriptural passages, but from the sense-experiences and necessary demonstrations.”

Sir Isaac Newton

The Mechanical Universe

Voltaire

Creator of Modern Religious Skepticism

The Enlightenment: The rise of Deism and The Enlightenment: The rise of Deism and skepticismskepticism

David HumeSays the skeptic:

“Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.”

Statue of Joseph Priestley

Founder of the Unitarian Church

LaPlace

About God:

“I have no need of that hypothesis”

Hutton Lyell

How Old is the Earth?

How Old is How Old is the Earth?the Earth?

James Hutton, 1795 Uniformitarianism “No vestige of a James Hutton, 1795 Uniformitarianism “No vestige of a beginning, no concept of an end.”beginning, no concept of an end.”

Charles Darwin

“It is mere rubbish to think at this point of the origin of life. One might as well think of the origin of matter.”

The Conservative Christian ReactionThe Conservative Christian Reaction

Scopes “monkey trial” 1925Scopes “monkey trial” 1925

Clarence Darrow and William Jennings Bryan

1940’s and afterward:

Creationism

Bad Science!

Intelligent Design: An Improvement?Intelligent Design: An Improvement?

Irreducible Complexity Does this “disprove Irreducible Complexity Does this “disprove evolution?”evolution?”

The Anthropic PrincipleThe Anthropic Principle A possible explanation for “why” the laws of the A possible explanation for “why” the laws of the

universe are what they are.universe are what they are. The laws of the universe are what they are so that The laws of the universe are what they are so that

we (ie human beings) can exist.we (ie human beings) can exist.

Can Science and Religion peacefully coexist?Can Science and Religion peacefully coexist?

The Language of The Language of GodGod

Reasons Collins believes in GodReasons Collins believes in God

1. There is something instead of nothing.1. There is something instead of nothing.2. The unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics.2. The unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics.3. The Big Bang.3. The Big Bang.4. Nature does not solve the problem of why.4. Nature does not solve the problem of why.5. The existence of time.5. The existence of time.6. Fine tuning of the universe. The “Goldilocks 6. Fine tuning of the universe. The “Goldilocks

Paradox.”Paradox.”7. Ockham’s Razor.7. Ockham’s Razor.8. The existence of moral law.8. The existence of moral law.

Documents

Science and Religion Science and Religion Science and religion Science and religion