Differences in the Methods of Science and Religion - Essay Example

Differences and similarities between science and religion methodology Differences in the methods of scienceand religion Proponents of the differing methods of science and technology highlight how through popular opinion, religion is viewed as pursuing methodologies that are based on faith while science is driven by cause and effect; evidence. Science is practiced through studying nature and works under the assumption that processes and events can be explained through analyzing the evidence from natural causes and not through divine intervention. With striking contrast, religion methodology is through revelation from deity and is recorded in sacred texts, which are passed from one generation to another and through prayer. Mysticism is key to the methodology of any religion (Underhill 43). To give further weight to the differences, a closer look at the creation theory (from biblical texts) compared to theories such as the continental drift and Darwinism will suffice. The creation theory states that, the universe and all life form in it originated from God -who created everything in six days with man being created on the last day. This is found in the book of Genesis; used as the basis of creationists fundamentalist Christians against evolutionists Charles Darwin then came up with the Darwinism theory of biological evolution. According to evolutionists, human beings evolved from apes to the present Homo Sapiens Sapiens through natural selection. They argue that in order to cope with the change in the environment, human beings adapted to the changing environment by weeding out the weak and only leaving the strongest to survive. The continental drift theory theorizes that the earth was initially a large land mass that split into seven continents due to tectonic plates shifting in the core of the earth’s crust. The two theories greatly differ with the creation theory (Ruse 24). The methodologies used by both factions are quite different. The creationists rely on sacred texts like the Bible to pursue an understanding of the universe while the evolutionists use scientific correlation of cause and effect to investigate the phenomena. The conflict thesis proposed by William Draper in 1875 aims to highlight the differing perspectives between religion and science. Draper came up with the conflict thesis to highlight how the two ‘conflicted’ in terms of methodology, intellectual framework, and politics. Others such as Richard Dawkins provide an in depth view of the epistemological differences between science and religion. He argues that science and religion differ in the way they formulate and hold beliefs. Religion uses faith-based methods while science uses reason-based methods. Dawkins in his theory suggests that science uses inductive statements that can be verified through statistical analysis on objective data. This means that, in science, hypothesis are established after which data is obtained and regressed to compare the accuracy through statistical tests. Comparisons are made between the null and alternative hypothesis, based on the results, in order to come up with conclusions regarding the observable phenomena. It involves looking at distribution curves in order to conclude whether, either the null or the alternative hypothesis is correct. It is a correlational experiment. Probabilities are also assigned sometimes in scientific experiments with specific values .In short, the scientific methods rely on inductive arguments rather than deductive arguments in order to generate beliefs. Science aims to investigate correlations and relationships between phenomena supported by empirical evidence. On the other hand, religion uses faith, which lacks empirical support. Proponents of religion base their beliefs on illogical inference, which lacks observable data and proof. Faith is based on spirituality and cannot be regressed upon by statistical techniques, or based on forming hypothesis. Questions are raised as to whether faith can be proved since there is no proof of its presence or the lack of it meaning faith is existent in the mind of a person, which lacks empirical validation. In finding the beliefs in religion, no logical means are used. Science as a method of study is not dependent on any theories being correct, as it is subject to experimentation and demands verification of held notions. On the other hand, religion places a greater emphasis on the claims of existence of a supernatural power that is not verifiable. Recourse towards trying to proof the lack of existence of divine power is not widely accepted among the dogmatic religious people. Science calls for criticism and expects its theorems to be modified and revoked if need be. New scientific information, even whether contradictory to previously accepted scientific facts, such as the recent demotion of Pluto from being a planet, are widely accepted. The pursuit of information in all avenues, if verifiable, is the norm. On the other hand, religion does not call for criticism and resists new information that might contradict previously accepted beliefs. The assertion for example, by Galileo Galilei, that the earth was spherical, was met by hysteria and anger by the dogmatic pope. This was because, if the earth was spherical and not flat as earlier thought, the idea of a heaven and hell would be questioned by religious followers since the north pole would be heaven while the south pole hell. . Similarities in the methods of science and religion Despite the age-old debate regarding the methodologies of both science and religion, some similarities can be seen. In both, their core goal is the pursuit of a greater understanding of the universe and knowledge in abundance. Many religions emphasis on the fact that, their followers should be invested in trying to uncover the mysteries of the universe in order to better themselves. The pursuit of knowledge is key in understanding the universe, in order to be in harmony with it. Religions such as Buddhism advocate for teachings on self-awareness and fulfillment through rigorous pursuit of knowledge in order to be closer to a higher divine power. This is achieved through symbolism, holy texts passed from generations to generations. Science, on the other hand, is guided by similar principles of pursing knowledge above all else. Scientific researchers and academics are tasked with responsibility of unlocking the secrets of the universe in order to become closer with nature. The seven assumptions about science, constituting the myth of science and scientists, can be used to highlight similarities in the two fields. Einstein theorized that the eleven dimensions of the universe placed our tangible physical reality in four dimensions, with the rest being placed on science for hypothesizing. Similarly, religions such as Christianity, Islam, and Judaism base their texts on the seven remaining assumptions of science. In religious terms, they are referred to as heavens or the after-life. The glaring similarities suggest that neither should be observed as a distinct field rather as intersecting. The emerging patterns should be crucially analyzed in depth in order to get an in depth analysis of the way the universe is connected through both religion and science. Existence of theoretical entities is present in both religion and science. A number of the most significant scientific discoveries, that shaped man’s world in the last few centuries, were based on physically unobservable phenomena. Through the use of theoretical entities in science, a greater account of the world has been observed such as the protons by Einstein , the unseen gravitational pull by Newton, among others .This has led to the emergence of a new age science that is more and more compatible with religion. Religion on the other hand, works based on a belief system, where non-observable phenomena such as a divine presence have not deterred people from believing in its existence. This is similar to the actions of pioneer scientists, in their pursuit of knowledge of the natural processes of the universe. Parallel comparisons are also made about their basis on faith. Religion is based on the faith that there is a creator of the universe, who controls and sees everything while science, is based on the faith of the laws of nature and the universe over all physical and natural processes and events. Science is supported by religious notions of a rational, orderly universe that is finite, which relates to the scientific theory of an orderly universe. According to Stevens, science could not have been able to exist without religious notions of the universe being finite and the rational orderliness of things (Stevens 34).He argues that, religion liberates science from rigid theories enabling it to enhance itself through experiments in the pursuit of knowledge. This he claims frees science to use patterns that were previously religiously formulated, to undertake its functions. It is of worth to mention that, one of the earliest scientific discoveries of the 19th century was conducted by men of religion. Muslims were the first to be identified with pursuing scientific discoveries and were later followed by Christians. This gives further credence to the fact that, fundamentally, religion and science are very similar. It is widely held by some scientists that, science grew and flourished due to religion’s interpretation of the universe (Giberson & Mariano, 43). A closer look at past civilizations such as the Aztecs and the Egyptians reveals a glaring closeness between the two ideologies. These societies were able to thrive in their eras, by forming governments that embraced scientific advancements-to better their lives, coupled with strict religious servitude to their religious leaders, who were also their political leaders. The seemingly contrasting ideologies of science and religion did not seem to interfere with the prosperity of the kingdoms. The pharaoh for instance, was both the spiritual and political leader of his people. Scientific innovations like the mummification of dead corpses, the building of the pyramids, give further credence to the argument that religion and science methodology is similar. Furthermore, the priests chosen by the pharaohs were actually men of science who had extensive knowledge in medicine, astronomy, and mathematics. For thousands of years, most of the religions restricted consumption of certain animals terming them as unclean. Dietary restrictions such as the draining of animal blood after slaughter, removal of fat during preparation of meat and prohibiting the consumption of pigs, red meat have later been proven through science, to be beneficial to the health of human beings. This is in contrast to the claims that religion only deals in spiritual matters. Religions like Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism among many others have practiced strict dietary regiments in order to cleanse the bodies of their followers. Many of the religions are also known to practice scientific measures such as the removal of bio-waste, washing their bodies as a sign of godliness, burying of the dead, condemning bestiality and incest. All these are sound scientific measures proven today, that were practiced thousands of years ago under religious matronage. Both science and religion are based on the assumption of a truth. Science is based on the idea of scientific materialism meaning that scientific analysis is the only surest form of explaining any physical phenomena. Most religious studies on the hand are based on similar ideas such as the presence of a singular God above all other gods. They are also both very dogmatic in their approach towards each other, viewing the other as inferior to them. Scientists, who squarely base their faith on scientific facts, do not believe in the existence of a superior spiritual being while religious fanatics, in some instances avoid scientific innovations such as the use of contraception citing religious texts. In my opinion, an analysis of both religion and science does not reveal a clear stand on their fundamental differences and similarities, as they are overlapping. In conclusion, Proponents of the differing methods of science and technology highlight how through popular opinion, religion is viewed as pursuing methodologies that are based on faith while science is driven by cause and effect; evidence. Despite the age-old debate regarding the methodologies of both science and religion, some similarities can be seen. In both, their core goal is the pursuit of a greater understanding of the universe and knowledge in abundance. This is achieved through symbolism, holy texts passed from generations to generations. Science, on the other hand, is guided by similar principles of pursing knowledge above all else. Scientific researchers and academics are tasked with responsibility of unlocking the secrets of the universe in order to become closer with nature (Underhill, 85). Works Cited Ruse, Michael. The Evolution-creation Struggle. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 2005. Print. Giberson, Karl, and Mariano Artigas. Oracles of Science: Celebrity Scientists versus God and Religion. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2007. Print. Stevens, Christopher John. Integrating Science and Theology an Examination of Ian Barbours Critical Realism. N.p.: n.p., 2004. Print. Underhill, Evelyn. Mysticism. United States: CreateSpace, 2011. Print. . Read More