by kowalskil 11 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Can science and religion coexist peacefully? This is a good question to start an interesting discussion among scientists, theologians and sociologists. See how this question was answered by many smart people at my website:
http://csam.montclair.edu/~kowalski/life/donotmix.html
Please forward this message to those who might be interested. Thank you in advance.
Ludwik Kowalski (see Wikipedia)
Professor Emeritus
Montclair State University, NJ
I am also the author of
Well, to answer the opening question, yes, of course they can - in as much as it depends on the person.
Tammy
Jerry Coyne wrote a recent column on this..." Science and religion aren't friends"
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-10-11-column11_ST_N.htm
"In the end, science is no more compatible with religion than with other superstitions, such as leprechauns. Yet we don't talk about reconciling science with leprechauns. We worry about religion simply because it's the most venerable superstition — and the most politically and financially powerful."
Science and relegion co-exits quite well and have done so for centuries.
www.biologos.org - "BioLogos is led by a group of Christians who are committed to promoting a perspective on the origins of life that is both theologically and scientifically sound."
This site does not try to prove religion and science are compatible. It is trying to prove it's own ideology, biased and with its own agenda. No different than JWs releasing the "Origins of Life" brochure.
If it was attempting to prove religion agrees with science, it would need to include Islam and Judaism ideologies, which along with Christianity makes up the vast majority of religions on earth. You can't pick and choose.
Science can't prove, and doesn't care to, that muslims will receive 72 virgins in the afterlife, that Joseph Smith found buried golden plates, or that the WTBS is divinely inspired by jesus.
I think you need to read the articles on that site, or don't it's up to you.
But don't be making blanket statements that are true.
Science does and has co-existed with religion for centuries.
Dear Dr. Kowalski,
You have picked an excellent forum to ask your question. This question is frequently discussed here, and there are a variety of views.
My personal view is that religion conflicts with science only when it has specific, testable dogmas regarding the natural, physical world. Where it does not attempt to do this, there can be no conflict. Religion should limit itself to questions of ultimate meaning and moral value.
Unlike religious beliefs, science does not deal with this realm. It deals with the natural, physical realm. Every concept held is always subject to further review in the light of new empirical evidence. Science collects empirical facts, and upon this constructs laws and theories to explain the facts.
Where the two areas can be harmonized, good things can result.
Human beings seek to know what is true about the physical world; for this the methods of science were slowly refined over many centuries.
Human beings also seek for the meanings of the things they see. They seek for guidance in how to live their lives.
For this, humans have repeatedly engaged in what we is called religion. Here too, we have seen refinement over many centuries, although also halting and uneven.
We have little evidence of participation in these two great quests in any species but our own. These are two uniquely human enterprises.
Where one enterprise fights or attempts to destroy the other, the strife erects a hindrance towards human progress. In times and places where religious regimes have sought to undermine science in order to protect dogma, humanity has suffered. In times and places where scientistic regimes have sought to undermine religion and spirituality, humanity has suffered as well. In centuries past, my ancestors suffered under the former. In more recent times, my family has suffered under the latter--totalitarian communist states (which is why I live in the US).
To deny either aspect of human nature is to make us less human.
I like what Albert Einstein once said: "Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind."
Incidentally, I have emailed you at your .edu address on the subject of cold fusion, which fascinates me.
BurnTheShips
PSacramento...I did check it out. Nothing there is new...been there, done that. Their basic message is "whatever science says we agree with it, but a god was behind it all." Fine, believe that a god did it...but it sure as hell was not the patriarchal, woman-suppressing, slave-condoning god of the bible.
PSacramento...I did check it out. Nothing there is new...been there, done that. Their basic message is "whatever science says we agree with it, but a god was behind it all." Fine, believe that a god did it...but it sure as hell was not the patriarchal, woman-suppressing, slave-condoning god of the bible.
I agree that there is nothing new there per say, like I said before science and religion have co-existed for centuries.
Sometimes not very civil mind you, bt that had to do with people and personalities more than anything else.
As for God not being the "patriarchal, woman-suppressing, slave-condoning god of the bible."
Yes, I agree.
Science does and has co-existed with religion for centuries.
But not peacefully. Science is based in reason. Religion is based in faith. Scientist (usually) won't condemn you to death if you disagree with them. Religion will condemn you even beyond the grave and hasten your trip.
