In 500 words or less, please discuss your views on whether or not our culture is receptive to the discussion and interaction of science and religion. You must use citations from the two readings and from the videos you have watched and include a citation page.
You must also respond to two different peers.
George Johnson, Bridging the divide between science and religion,
Religion and science, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/religion-science/#WhatScieReliHowDoTheyInte
respond in few Sentences to two different peers::
1- The culture that we live in now is combined with many different cultures and different religions too. In my opinion and what I see that many people dislike talking about religion for many reasons. People prefer talking about daily routine and science and else more than talking about religion and science. On the other hand, I like to talk about my religion and discuss my beliefs to people who want me to do so. My thoughts do not reverse the science thoughts about the religion but what I think that there might be little connection between these two. I remember on Christmas I celebrate on Christmas and I try to share my happiness with friends and people that I work with. I found that some people that do not celebrate Christmas, and when I try to congrats them, they said sorry we do not celebrate Christmas and that was not all of them but it was some of them. That is why I am saying keep the discussion away between religion and science. Both science and religion are complex social and cultural endeavors that vary across cultures and have changed over time Confucian thought has held different views of science over time. Public acceptance of scientific facts may be influenced by religion; many in the United States reject the idea of evolution by natural selection, especially regarding human beings. Nevertheless, the American National Academy of Sciences has written that “the evidence for evolution can be fully compatible with religious faith”, a view officially endorsed by many religious denominations globally. other scientists and some contemporary theologians hold that religion and science are non-overlapping magisterial, addressing fundamentally separate forms of knowledge and aspects of life. Some theologians or historians of science, including John Lennox, Thomas Berry, Brian Swimmer, and Ken Wilber propose an interconnection between science and religion, while others such as Ian Barbour believe there are even parallels. The Conflict model assumes that religion and science are incompatible and that only one of these is a legitimate source of knowledge. We are familiar with the militant atheist-types like Richard Dawkins, who deride any kind of religious sentiment. For them, religion is a delusion and the only true knowledge is scientific knowledge, which is subject to testing and objective analysis. However, what Dawkins and others like him do not acknowledge is that everyone is religious in some way. Roy Closure argues convincingly in The Myth of Religious Neutrality (Links to an external site.) that anything that is assumed to be true without question is thereby religious. Thus, Dawkins’ naturalistic perspective is religious.
2- I believe that our culture respects and accepts discussions about religion and science. In fact, it is due to the continuous development of technology and the freedom of the social atmosphere. For a time, people believed that religion and science were antagonistic because science falsified some of the knowledge and ideas of religion. For example, heliocentric theory opposes the Christian theory that the earth is the center of the universe, so Bruno were burned to death. However, people are gradually becoming aware of the loopholes and limitations of religion. For example, almost any religion will have a statement about how the world is formed and how everything in the world comes from, which is inconsistent with the current scientific interpretation of the cosmic source and natural selection doctrine. It is not advisable to blindly accept and believe in all the doctrines and content of religion in today’s society. Religion is also continually improving and developing with the help of science.
Therefore, people gradually realize that science and religion are complementary. In other words, religion and science both have limitations and therefore need to complement and develop. According to the author, “As Barr pointed out, many of modernity’s great scientists, from Copernicus, Newton, Secchi, and Galileo himself to Georges Lemaître and Bernard Bolzano were practicing Christians or even men of the cloth” (Mills). Some people may wonder why scientists also have religious beliefs. Because scientific research is the doubts of the external world we are in, and religion is mostly to solve or try to solve our inner problems. Of course, science can also study inner activities or ideological problems such as psychology, but religion will explore the inner world from the doctrines and philosophical thoughts of religion, which is not available in science. I think that people with reason, open mind, and critical thinking are willing to discuss the relationship of religion and science. Most people not only have their own beliefs but also believe in science and think rationally. As it mentions in the article, “Science can purify religion from error and superstition; religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes. Each can draw the other into a wider world, a world in which both can flourish” (Roels). Science and religion can coexist in harmony, and they play different roles in different fields.
Mill, M. Anthony. “What Does It Mean to Say That Science & Religion Conflict?” RealClear Religion, www.realclearreligion.org/articles/2018/04/16/what_does_it_mean_to_say_that_science_and_religion_conflict.html. Accessed 14 May 2019.
Roels, S. Bodbyl. “Are science and Christianity at war?” Biologos, biologos.org/common-questions/are-science-and-christianity-at-war/. Accessed 14 May 2019.