Relationship between religion and science - Wikipedia
yes there is a relation between culture and science. If culture involves the set of knowledge, beliefs and patterns of behavior, there is no doubt that science is. The sciences and the arts and humanities often seek to answer very different kinds of the nature of the world we inhabit, and the relationship between the two. Essay on the relation between Science and Culture Introduction: Science does not help us in defining 'human development', though it is.
We should therefore remember the contributions of other civilizations to the understanding of nature—in particular the perception of the world in areas such as Asia and Africa, or among the indigenous people of Australia and South America. Such traditional or indigenous knowledge is now increasingly being used not only with the aim of finding new drugs, but also to derive new concepts that may help us to reconcile empiricism and science.
During the Renaissance, European scientists and philosophers started challenging long-held beliefs and developed a new natural philosophy.
Science and Culture
Science and the arts truly flourished in Europe, and this was caused and furthered by various positive developments that took place at that time. Most importantly, the new philosophy started a process that eventually led to the independence of scientific thought and theories from myths, religion and theology.
Second, the interaction among different European cultures stimulated creativity through new ways of thinking and new paradigms for the observation of nature. But the foundations of modern science were laid long before this time, and were particularly influenced by Islamic civilization. But the mystery of water itself is not explained. There is a creative power which organizes various levels of reality. Science has yet to tackle these various levels of reality in the total range of existence.
Sociology works today on the basis of certain new tendencies created in the west: These tendencies were responsible for Nietzsche's philosophy and for some forms of imperialism that prevailed during the last few centuries.
One of the basic principles of modern collectivism is the idea that the individual should sacrifice himself for the progress and welfare of the race. It is assumed that nature seeks to preserve the type: Kaiser's as well as Hitler's Germany sought to apply this basis of collectivism within Germany and flaunt the idea of race superiority outside her borders.
But there cannot any true culture unless we think of the individual, not as an egoistic unit but as a soul: True unity can only spring out of a reception born of love. It will then be clear to us that the separate growth of individual is as important as the equal and parallel development of society.
We may therefore say that science, which is master in the knowledge of process and of apt machinery, cannot by itself contribute to the perfection of our being because it is ignorant of the foundation of our being and of world being.
Science has contributed a great deal to human welfare. Through the gospel of reason and experimental observation, by which it works, it has enabled man to acquire intellectual integrity and even purity of mind by canceling vulgar and tawdry emotions.
It has brought about a mechanized unity of material life. But it has also been responsible for ushering in a system of civilization which is too big for our limited mental capacity.
It has multiplied our wants by creating new ones and it has facilitated aggressive domination by the collective ego. We have almost come to believe that the cult of the average man with his freedom and self-sufficiency and a perfected economy are the summum bonum of life.
If our passion for perfection is to be satisfied, we have to learn to communicate with the soul of the individual and not his ego. Psychology has to explore the higher mental planes in order to be fully itself.
Art has to probe further into the world of infinite beauty hidden in man's consciousness. Ethics has to discover that the law of good is nothing other than the law of God. The historians have not merely to study the mass movements and the economic and political events and vicissitudes that affect humanity.
They have to discover in the panorama of events the underlying soul pattern. The vital issue that faces man today is whether his progress has to be governed by the modern materialistic mind or by a nobler pragmatism, guided by spiritual culture and knowledge. Equilibrium has to be established between man's internal and external worlds. Scientists have helped to establish mastery of man over his environment.
An Atomic blast can destroy the whole world. Atomic energy is, therefore, absolute power. Scientifically speaking, we live in the Atomic Age. Culturally, we still belong to the Stone Age. It was in the 17th century that the concept of "religion" received its modern shape despite the fact that ancient texts like the Bible, the Quran, and other sacred texts did not have a concept of religion in the original languages and neither did the people or the cultures in which these sacred texts were written.
Science and culture
Throughout classical South Asiathe study of law consisted of concepts such as penance through piety and ceremonial as well as practical traditions. Medieval Japan at first had a similar union between "imperial law" and universal or "Buddha law", but these later became independent sources of power.
Christianity accepted reason within the ambit of faith. In Christendomreason was considered subordinate to revelationwhich contained the ultimate truth and this truth could not be challenged.
Even though the medieval Christian had the urge to use their reason, they had little on which to exercise it. In medieval universities, the faculty for natural philosophy and theology were separate, and discussions pertaining to theological issues were often not allowed to be undertaken by the faculty of philosophy.
It was an independent field, separated from theology, which enjoyed a good deal of intellectual freedom as long as it was restricted to the natural world.
In general, there was religious support for natural science by the late Middle Ages and a recognition that it was an important element of learning. With significant developments taking place in science, mathematics, medicine and philosophy, the relationship between science and religion became one of curiosity and questioning.
Essay on the relation between Science and Culture
Renaissance humanism looked to classical Greek and Roman texts to change contemporary thought, allowing for a new mindset after the Middle Ages.
Renaissance readers understood these classical texts as focusing on human decisions, actions and creations, rather than blindly following the rules set forth by the Catholic Church as "God's plan. Renaissance humanism was an "ethical theory and practice that emphasized reason, scientific inquiry and human fulfillment in the natural world," said Abernethy. With the sheer success of science and the steady advance of rationalismthe individual scientist gained prestige.
This allowed more people to read and learn from the scripture, leading to the Evangelical movement. The people who spread this message, concentrated more on individual agency rather than the structures of the Church. It teaches people to be satisfied with trivial, supernatural non-explanations and blinds them to the wonderful real explanations that we have within our grasp. It teaches them to accept authority, revelation and faith instead of always insisting on evidence.Hindi - Amazing Scientific Reasons Behind Hindu Traditions & Culture - Hinduism - JustGyan
Because of this both are incompatible as currently practiced and the debate of compatibility or incompatibility will be eternal. Stenger 's view is that science and religion are incompatible due to conflicts between approaches of knowing and the availability of alternative plausible natural explanations for phenomena that is usually explained in religious contexts.
Carrollsince religion makes claims that are not compatible with science, such as supernatural events, therefore both are incompatible. According to Dawkins, religion "subverts science and saps the intellect". According to Renny Thomas' study on Indian scientists, atheistic scientists in India called themselves atheists even while accepting that their lifestyle is very much a part of tradition and religion.
Thus, they differ from Western atheists in that for them following the lifestyle of a religion is not antithetical to atheism. EllisKenneth R. MillerKatharine HayhoeGeorge Coyne and Simon Conway Morris argue for compatibility since they do not agree that science is incompatible with religion and vice versa. They argue that science provides many opportunities to look for and find God in nature and to reflect on their beliefs.
Science in Culture - Arts and Humanities Research Council
What he finds particularly odd and unjustified is in how atheists often come to invoke scientific authority on their non-scientific philosophical conclusions like there being no point or no meaning to the universe as the only viable option when the scientific method and science never have had any way of addressing questions of meaning or God in the first place.
Furthermore, he notes that since evolution made the brain and since the brain can handle both religion and science, there is no natural incompatibility between the concepts at the biological level. He argues that leaders in science sometimes trump older scientific baggage and that leaders in theology do the same, so once theological intellectuals are taken into account, people who represent extreme positions like Ken Ham and Eugenie Scott will become irrelevant.
Conflict thesis The conflict thesiswhich holds that religion and science have been in conflict continuously throughout history, was popularized in the 19th century by John William Draper 's and Andrew Dickson White 's accounts.
It was in the 19th century that relationship between science and religion became an actual formal topic of discourse, while before this no one had pitted science against religion or vice versa, though occasional complex interactions had been expressed before the 19th century. If Galileo and the Scopes trial come to mind as examples of conflict, they were the exceptions rather than the rule.
By Galileo went to Rome to try to persuade Catholic Church authorities not to ban Copernicus' ideas. In the end, a decree of the Congregation of the Index was issued, declaring that the ideas that the Sun stood still and that the Earth moved were "false" and "altogether contrary to Holy Scripture", and suspending Copernicus's De Revolutionibus until it could be corrected.
Galileo was found "vehemently suspect of heresy", namely of having held the opinions that the Sun lies motionless at the center of the universe, that the Earth is not at its centre and moves.