Religion & Science: Conflict or Compatible? - Essay Sample

Introduction

There is a widespread belief in the present-day world that religion and science conflict, and are incompatible with each other. The relationship between these areas, notably, has been a subject of debate in theology and philosophy for many years (Preston & Epley, 2009). The interdisciplinary field of "theology and science" aims at determining how the two disciplines interact and whether religious beliefs pose threats to scientific inquiry. McPhetres and Zuckerman (2018) said that people view the connection between the two subjects as general or limited. According to the latter version, the opposition between science and religion only exists in a few topics where scientific knowledge opposes theological assertions in subjects such as the origins of humans and the Earth (McPhetres & Zuckerman, 2018). Outside of these areas, the limited perspective would not expect believers or religious teachings to contradict science. McPhetres and Zuckerman (2018) noted that several research findings indicate that conflict between religious beliefs and science is more general in the United States. However, science and religion are compatible and do not oppose each other because they represent separate areas of inquiry, asking and answering questions in different fields of study without overlap.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

How the Two Disciplines Conflict

Personal Religious Beliefs and Scientific Evidence

Research shows that scientific consensus on critical issues affecting the world has a negative correlation with religious beliefs; thus, a source of conflict between the two areas (McPhetres & Zuckerman, 2018). Even topics such as climate change and vaccination, which do not challenge religious claims have an inverse correlation with a scientific perspective (McPhetres & Zuckerman, 2018). In this regard, the concern among the people of faith is that scientists are "playing God" (McPhetres & Zuckerman, 2018). Whereas there are no specific religious texts that raise objections against scientific research, believers justify their opposition to issues like vaccinations in terms of their faith and the morality of the subject matter. However, Christianity has Biblical teachings about the creation of the universe and the sanctity of life, which contradict evolution and stem cell research in science, respectively (McPhetres & Zuckerman, 2018). The general point of contention, in this perspective, is whether science or religion is a correct and a better tool that enhances an understanding of the world.

Research shows that the hostility between science and religion has spread to the field of education (McPhetres & Zuckerman, 2018). A study in the United States indicates that greater religiosity leads to a decline in favorable views concerning scientific innovations (McPhetres & Zuckerman, 2018). According to McPhetres and Zuckerman (2018), there are high chances that more religious people are less likely to choose a career in the field of science. However, this phenomenon exists despite an increasing skepticism towards science across the country. The study further shows that children from highly religious backgrounds tend to develop negative attitudes towards science about 20 years later (McPhetres & Zuckerman, 2018). The author said that this trend might undermine literacy levels among American children (McPhetres & Zuckerman, 2018). Here, it is no doubt that the findings bring to light the hostility between religion and science. The primary concern among believers or the people of faith is that science advances explanations and ideas that go against their religious teachings and beliefs.

The Total Conflict Theory and Religious Beliefs

Legare and Visala (2011) explored the principles of the Total Conflict Theory to determine the connection between scientific evidence and religious beliefs. The model asserts that the two areas of inquiry offer conflicting explanations on the same phenomena; thus, the coexistence of their worldviews is not possible (Legare & Visala, 2011). The fact that the two fields offer conflicting explanations on the same issues shows that they are not in harmony with each other. Legare and Visala (2011) noted that there is almost a complete overlap in the content of the two philosophies. The theory further states that one must always choose between a religious and scientific set of beliefs if he/she wants to become rational (Legare & Visala, 2011). Notably, this theoretical model has a weakness because it does not consider that the two philosophies are about different things. In other words, the theory has limitations as it assumes that religious and scientific beliefs are the same in explaining the same phenomena.

Nonetheless, Legare and Visala (2011) argued against the Total Conflict Theory, which supports the argument that science and religion are irreconcilable. Legare and Visala (2011), claimed that the model does not represent what happens at the level of individual psychology. In reality, people rarely consider supernatural and natural beliefs as mutually exclusive. The theory also requires considerable reflective cognitive efforts because it says that supernatural reasoning is a vital and fundamental aspect of human cognition (Legare & Visala, 2011).

How the Two Areas Converge

Explanation of Scientific and Supernatural Causes of Specific Phenomena

Scientific and religious understanding of the world in three domains, namely the nature of death, causes of illnesses, and the origin of species, shows that the two disciplines converge (Legare & Visala, 2011). The authors argued that the three perspectives are fruitful areas of studying the coexistence of science and religion for several reasons. First, the explanations of the three phenomena are prevalent across the cultures of the world. As a result, there is a high tendency that individuals can answer questions concerning the origin of species, causes of diseases, and the nature of death without stating whether scientific or religious explanations are superior (Legare & Visala, 2011). Secondly, people easily develop intense existential anxieties and emotions in the three domains, suggesting that the natural and supernatural perspectives converge. Here, questions about illnesses and death concern mortality and feelings of loss. For the origins of humans, the issue concerns how people understand themselves and, more importantly, their relationship with the rest of the natural world. Lastly, investigating the coexistence of the two areas of study is informative as it requires individuals to invoke ideas and reasoning that is beyond their everyday experience (Legare & Visala, 2011).

The Scope of Science and Religion

Religious beliefs and science are not in contradiction because they concern different matters. In this perspective, science revolves around the world of nature and has nothing to do with religion. Science, often, advances knowledge about the natural world. Also, it provides explanations that people can reject or accept by experiment and observation. However, scientists do not take a position in a variety of issues outside the natural world. Some of them are social values, business, and economic concerns, and the meaning of life, to mention a few. The only exception that science talks about religion are instances where its beliefs contradict scientific knowledge about the natural world (Preston & Epley, 2009).

Science transcends political, religious, and cultural beliefs as it has nothing decisive to say about these topics. That science is an independent discipline that goes beyond religious constraints, and cultural differences are one of its fundamental virtues. From a scientific perspective, there is no consensus or valid knowledge about the purpose and the meaning of life, suggesting that there is harmony between science and religion. Besides, modern science has principles that guide the study of the natural world rather than ethical or moral laws that enhance an understanding of human society. Legare and Visala (2011) studied the effect of religiosity on science literacy and also the impact on the overall attitudes towards science. The authors concluded that although religion adversely impacts children's love for education, it is not among educational issues that might undermine science literacy levels in US schools (Legare & Visala, 2011). This point suggests that the degree of hostility between religion and science is shallow. More importantly, the study concluded that the conflict only exists among highly religious Americans, suggesting that the opposition between science and religion is inconsequential.

There are no definitive religious explanations of natural phenomena because they belong to science. Here, religion does not provide answers as to why processes like volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, droughts, and tsunamis, among other events, occur. The sacred texts and even religious beliefs, unlike science, do not explore the aspects that trigger such incidences in the natural world. Since science concerns the study of cause and effect, it explains developments that happen in the natural world (Preston &Epley, 2009). For example, it provides an account of how planets, stars, and galaxies developed because they are within the area of the natural world. The people of faith, notably, may explain scientific breakthroughs in religious terms, but the origin is the area of science. Although believers explain innovations and advances in different spheres of life from a spiritual perspective, they credit scientists for essential discoveries that improve the quality of life. This phenomenon shows that area of religion do not oppose science

The Position of the Paper

Religion and science are separate areas of study that should not be hostile to each other. The two fields are compatible since they concern different matters. From the analysis of the opposing perspectives, the paper concludes that the arguments supporting the view that religion and science do not oppose each other carries more weight. Science deals with the study of the phenomena within the natural world. Religion, in contrast, concerns the relationship between humans and God, moral values that inspire people, the purpose, and the meaning of life. Since science and religion study different things, there are no points of conflict except in areas where one of them makes assertions that contradict the other. Arguments that science opposes religion and vice versa have limitations because it only represents personal beliefs about faith. Also, such claims do not reflect the absolute principles of science in different areas of inquiry. The position of the paper has a cultural significance. The reason is that the essay recognizes that science transcends cultural beliefs, meaning it has nothing to do with people's way of life. Also, the paper acknowledges that science goes beyond religious and cultural differences.

There are several strategies to strengthen the thesis and the position of this paper or rather enhance harmony between science and religion. First, the people of faith should acknowledge the positive contributions that science has to the believers and how it promotes the will of God. Importantly, here, a person of faith may interpret scientific advances using religious terms as a way to foster a connection between the two areas of study. Secondly, there should be proper boundaries between religion and science as a way to avoid transgressions and assertions that contradict spiritual matters and scientific knowledge. Believers should also admit the remarkable and wondrous achievements of science to enhance harmony between the two contexts....