Science vs. Religion - Must We Choose Between Them?

by bavman 74 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  bavman

  I dare to say science and religion are two different animals. They may try to explain similar things but in different ways. An example of trying to explain a similar thing might be the age old question of how did we get here? Some might point to a particular creation myth that they know of because of the culture they grew up in. Some might point to the scientific view of evolution. Is either of these more right or more wrong than the other? I dare to say no. I believe they are simply two different ways of trying to explain the same question.

  Which brings me to the subject of myth. Are myths false, untrue stories? I again dare to say no. I don't recall the name of a Native American man who said this but his preface to his peoples creation myth explains this thought well. He said, 'I don't know if it happened this way or not, but I know this story is true.'

  To me religion is a different way of experiencing reality than science. Both can be true and helpful, both can be untrue and hurtful. It is up to us to find what works for us and communicate to others what is hurtful not only to ourselves but to society.

  I don't believe man will ever live without either religion or science nor would I want us too. We need religion and science to be whole persons and to live a life that is not dry but instead enriching.
• 

  Ticker

  Who truly knows until you die? I have to believe science though because much of it is proven and undeniable. Some of religion is interesting and apealing but whether its true or not, who knows? As far as I have experienced organized religion stinks ass! And this goes for new religious movements(cults) or extablished religions. I tend to follow my own beliefs and don't give much weight people trying to push their beliefs on me.

  Ticker
• 

  onacruse

  We need religion and science to be whole persons and to live a life that is not dry but instead enriching.

  Religion can bleed one dry, as can science.

  We make dichotomies where none really exist: "This is America, and over this 'line' is Mexico." The dirt, air, and water are the same on both sides.
• 

  Madame Quixote

  Must we choose between them? Not in a true democracy, but the scientific method is not democratic. It is exclusionary and limited by virtue of the fact that it must objectively find facts.

  However, Theological "biology" (creationism=intelligent design) is not (and should not be) taken seriously in the scientific community. Similarly, state-endorsed religion should not be allowed in a democracy.

  Analogy:

  In having a separation of church and state, we have not had to choose between whether or not to have a state, versus whether or not to have religion. In the US, we have plenty of both (50 states and a gazillion religions).

  Even some scientists are religious, though. And that is perfectly fine, as long as their religion does not interfere with their abilities to conduct research objectively, leaving their subjective religious p.o.v. out of all scientific debates.

  Unfortunately, some have a penchant for mixing religion into science (as with the intelligent design movement). Such ideas are completely antithetical to modern scientific research and thinking.

  Such mixing religion into science is also extremely damaging to the reputation and credibility of American scientific research and study, which is definitely bad for America, both in terms of its reputation in the world and in terms of the actual integrity of its scientific community.

  Exploring and examining certain religious ideas such as creationism is perfectly okay in a religion and philosophy class, but positing such ideas as scientific "theory" makes one a laughing stock in the world of true scientific thought and research.

  Unless you are trying to decide between choosing a career in evolutionary biology as opposed to choosing a career in theology, you probably won't need to choose between science and religion (simply because evolution is a bottom-up scientific theory that should not, cannot and does not include a religious theory of creationism, until over-riding evidence demonstrates that bottom-up evolutionary theory is wrong, which is most unlikely, and laughable among all respected, peer-reviewed evolutionary research).

  Avoiding such gaffes (as mixing science into religion) is not choosing between one or the other; it is simply keeping a logical, intelligent and feasible separation of science from religion - something that is beneficial for us all.
• 

  JamesThomas

  Both religion and science are just different ways in which the mind attempts to explain or define the essential qualities of reality. However, as beliefs in a god are not God, and theories regarding a tree are not a tree, the mind's activity actually hides the reality we seek. So, in a way, which ever we choose -- it's the same.

  There is another way.

  j
• 

  Handsome Dan

  All religions have roots of human ignorance and have been supported on that ignorance as history has shown

  Spiritualistic beliefs have always been a proponent of fear of the unknown and have been a controlling and obtaining factor for men to empower themselves, so if ignorance is empowering

  to maintain that power religions have to try and place blinders on men and have their sites set directly at the religiuos leaders. I liken this to in a way placing a box on the heads of the

  believers.If power was achieved then power has to be absolutely maintained. Religions have never been a proponement to free thinking, analysis and discovery because of that very fact.

  ( You can use the WTS. as an example of this ) Kingdoms had to built and were built. But there is a catch to this thinking, for some people religion offers a sense of guildance and direction

  and a way of life that they think is beneficial to them. This emotional sense of security is something science can never provide and can unintentionally dilute it.

  I personally wonder if a religion could ever be built and developed on the principles of democracy by the construting believers all in tune with both in mind.?

  Now thats the kind of religion I'd like to belong to., unrealistic dreamer that I am
• 

  bavman

  Unfortunately, some have a penchant for mixing religion into science (as with the intelligent design movement). Such ideas are completely antithetical to modern scientific research and thinking .

  Such mixing religion into science is also extremely damaging to the reputation and credibility of American scientific research and study, which is definitely bad for America, both in terms of its reputation in the world and in terms of the actual integrity of its scientific community.

  Exploring and examining certain religious ideas such as creationism is perfectly okay in a religion and philosophy class, but positing such ideas as scientific "theory" makes one a laughing stock in the world of true scientific thought and research.

  I would agree. Science and religion are different. It is not a good idea to mix them because they are two different ways of looking at things.

  There is another way.

  I assume Sir Thomas that by 'another way' you would mean (if I understand your' posts somewhat correctly) simply 'letting be' and being in tune with 'what is'. I would agree this is a 'good way'. I would also argue that religion does teach this same thing if not taken too literally and if you don't get stuck on the rituals, sacred writings, and hierarchal hoopla.
• 

  Madame Quixote

  bavman said:

  I assume Sir Thomas that by 'another way' you would mean (if I understand your' posts somewhat correctly) simply 'letting be' and being in tune with 'what is'. I would agree this is a 'good way'. I would also argue that religion does teach this same thing if not taken too literally and if you don't get stuck on the rituals, sacred writings, and hierarchal hoopla."

  And if you don't get stuck in some kind of religious mindset that causes indifference or a laissez-faire attitude about human suffering, inequity and depravity. Such "letting go" can be taken way too far, on an individual and collective level, as the JW organization most profoundly demonstrates.

  James, "so in a way, whichever we choose," it's not the same. Our choices determing our future.

  Choosing ignorance or superstition over knowledge and science is definitely NOT the same in any way, shape or form. Otherwise, we would all still live in the Dark Ages.
• 

  serotonin_wraith

  Religion halts progress. It is the method humans use to explain the unexplainable, until science is able to take over.

  They used to worship the Sun God because they wanted the sun to rise each morning. Finally science taught that the Earth was really spinning around a distant star. Then there's the Thunder God, the Rain God, the God of Fertility... Humans also believed the Earth was flat, had four corners, was the centre of the universe and less than 10,000 years old. It took brave scientists to risk (and even lose) their lives to get the truth out because of religion.

  The two cannot co-exist without disputes coming up.
• 

  Handsome Dan

  I personally wonder if a religion could ever be built and developed on the principles of democracy by the construting believers all in tune with both in mind.?

  Now thats the kind of religion I'd like to belong to., unrealistic dreamer that I am