Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Why religion and science can coexist
Influence of religion on science
Effects of religion and science
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Why religion and science can coexist
There is an estimation of a total of 8.7 million species on Earth and at least 10,000 more discovered each year on Earth. One such species, known as the African unicorn or the okapi, has a surprising background in history. An adequate amount of humans would not guess that this mysterious creature was not a living relative of the giraffe. To acknowledge how such diversity of species on this planet arose, we must look at the tree of life, or evolution. Evolution is the adaptations in external and internal characteristics of groups of plants, animals, and fungi after sizeable passage of generations. In biology, the definition of species is a group of animals who can successfully interbreed with each other sexually. This is important for taxonomy …show more content…
From what I have observed, most controversy stems from people who don’t understand evolution. They explain evolution as a dog giving birth to a cat or an ape giving birth to a human when these creatures at one point had a common ancestor, consequently diverging and evolving to what they are now. People don’t want to try to understand or are indoctrinated into thinking their religious beliefs explanation is the only way the world works. Religion is an annoyance to the progression of science, but religion isn't completely bad because it gives a lot of people a purpose in their life but that isn’t the objective of science. Science does not care about people's comfort, it questions the validity of religion and people become angry when their source of security is questioned. Science is not always uncomforting, instead it can give us a feeling of amazement or sense of wonder because it helps us realize that we are here by chance and we are extremely lucky to be alive and with that we can use it as inspiration to keep living to see the rest of this beautiful world. Coexistence between science and religion is possible, but people need to respect each other's boundaries no matter what side they are coming
The idea of evolution by Darwin indicated that the world is not created by God, but through some kind of modification. This controversial idea is strongly objected by most of the religions, such as Catholic, Christian, and Islam etc. These religions sturdily believe that God is the creator of the world, the creator of everything. However, to some extent, Buddhism does teach the similar theory to Darwin’s idea, which Buddhism does not include the idea of God. Also, like the way Darwin talks about “Natural Selection”, Buddhism says that if a person wants to have improvement, he or she must do the good things and undo the bad things. Therefore, as a Buddhist, the idea of evolution shown a positive affect on my beliefs, and it emphasizes and truly proves the teaching of Buddha in a scientific way.
Religion and politics should never have control of science, instead they should use science to help explain their own goals. Science should be used as a way challenging old beliefs and help clear out fact from fiction. At the same time though, science should challenge itself so it can stay true to its main point of challenging old dogmas as Carl Sagan said in his article. This includes the introduction of the heliocentric model and the debate about pluto being a planet, that ended up changing view points on many
Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection explains the general laws by which any given species transforms into other varieties and species. Darwin extends the application of his theory to the entire hierarchy of classification and states that all forms of life have descended from one incredibly remote ancestor. The process of natural selection entails the divergence of character of specific varieties and the subsequent classification of once-related living forms as distinct entities on one or many levels of classification. The process occurs as a species varies slightly over the course of numerous generations. Through inheritance, natural selection preserves each variation that proves advantageous to that species in its present circumstances of living, which include its interaction with closely related species in the “struggle for existence” (Darwin 62).
Creation or evolution? Such a question holds significant importance to the human race, raising further questions such as where did we come from, how did we get here, and more importantly where are we, the human race, going and where will we end up? Creationism, as cited from Oxford Dictionary, is “The belief that the universe and living organisms originate from specific acts of divine creation, as in the biblical account, rather than by natural processes such as evolution,” answers in its very definition one of humanity 's great questions referring to our origin. A religion such as Christianity, stated by the Bible and religious doctrine has its own set of answers to our origin as a human race. Similarly, the theory of Evolution is, as stated by the Oxford dictionary “The process by which different kinds of living organism are
After Sir Charles Darwin had introduced his original theory about the origins of species and evolution, humanity’s faith in God that remained undisputed for hundreds of years had reeled. The former unity fractured into the evolutionists, who believed that life as we see it today had developed from smaller and more primitive organisms, and creationists, who kept believing that life in all its diversity was created by a higher entity. Each side introduced substantial arguments to support their claims, but at the same time the counter-arguments of each opponent are also credible. Therefore, the debates between the evolutionists and the creationists seem to be far from ending. And though their arguments are completely opposite, they can co-exist or even complement each other.
In their First Declaration from the Lacandon Jungle, the Zapatista National Liberation Army (El Ejército Zapatista de Liberación National) when declaring that they were “a product of 500 years of struggle” made a statement whose profundity escaped nearly all who read it and may have even escaped the writers themselves. The body-as-genocide that is declared here extended well-beyond the individual bodies of Zapatista members and spoke of a profound ontological reterritorialization which remade the Mayan and Incan bodies (among others) into Indian flesh. This rebellion against suffering structured by genocide, what we might call a “grammar of suffering” in following the thought of Dr. Frank Wilderson, took place differently in different places.
“The lack of conflict between science and religion arises from a lack of overlap between their respective domains of professional expertise—science in the empirical constitution of the universe, and religion in the search for proper ethical values and the spiritual meaning of our lives. The attainment of wisdom in a full life requires extensive attention to both domains—for a great book tells us that the truth can make us free and that we will live in optimal harmony with our fellows when we learn to do justly, love mercy, and walk humbly.”
Religion and science are complementary elements to our society. The notion that religion and science should not be merged together, does not mean neglecting to understand the parallel relation between these two concepts and will result in a better understanding of our surroundings. This will put an end to our scientific research and advancement because we will be relying on answers provided by religious books to answer our questions. If we don’t argue whether these answers are right or wrong, we would never have studied space stars or the universe or even our environment and earthly animals. These studies have always provided us with breakthroughs, inventions and discoveries that made our lives better.
Creation Vs Evolution “The greatest mystery of existence is existence itself” (Chopra). Chopra, a world-renowned author, perceives the existence of life as a truly mystifying celebration. The pending question that many scientists, and even theists, attempt to answer is how life ultimately began. Currently, the mystery is left with two propositions, evolution and creation. While both approaches attempt to answer the origins of life, evolution and creation are two contrasting concepts.
At first glance, many facets of science and religion seem to be in direct conflict with each other. Because of this, I have generally kept them confined to separate spheres in my life. I have always thought that science is based on reason and cold, hard facts and is, therefore, objective. New ideas have to be proven many times by different people to be accepted by the wider scientific community, data and observations are taken with extreme precision, and through journal publications and papers, scientists are held accountable for the accuracy and integrity of their work. All of these factors contributed to my view of science as objective and completely truthful. Religion, on the other hand, always seems fairly subjective. Each person has their own personal relationship with God, and even though people often worship as a larger community with common core beliefs, it is fine for one person’s understanding of the Bible and God to be different from another’s. Another reason that Christianity seems so subjective is that it is centered around God, but we cannot rationally prove that He actually exists (nor is obtaining this proof of great interest to most Christians). There are also more concrete clashes, such as Genesis versus the big bang theory, evolution versus creationism, and the finality of death versus the Resurrection that led me to separate science and religion in my life. Upon closer examination, though, many of these apparent differences between science and Christianity disappeared or could at least be reconciled. After studying them more in depth, science and Christianity both seem less rigid and inflexible. It is now clear that intertwined with the data, logic, and laws of scien...
Christianity and science are seen to conflict with each other because people approach both views the same way; instead, they should be taken differently. There are certain things that can be explained with science and other things with Christianity. There are incidents that science cannot explain and people believe that those things are still true without evidence. Christianity is not opposed to science unless it contradicts the word of God written in the Bible. Scientific method is not the only way to find the absolute truth. The scientific and Christian view of the world will always have some conflict and misunderstanding because they attempt to explain in essence two different things.
Understanding science and religion historically most individuals would assume that the two differ more than they relate. For decades, there has been the overwhelming debate about the differences between science and religion, and the issues that have set them apart from each other. However, personally, when it comes to the views, and goals of the two they share very similar ideologies and attributes.
INDTRODUCTION “Sex and Religion”? Those two don’t really go hand in hand,” commented a freshman student from UF. Like this student, numerous people around the world believe this misconception to be true. Whether people argue for or against the importance of gender in religion, more than just what goes on in the bedroom has been heating up lately. Many debates have sparked due to the negative connotation associated with sex when confronted about its position in religious cultures.
The relationship between science and religion has been debated for many years. With strong personal opinions and beliefs, it is not surprising that no progress has been made in this argument. In my opinion, I feel as though religion and science have to be related in some way. There is no possible way people can separate two things that attempt to prove the same facts. My belief is that a metaphorical bridge has to be formed to connect the two. Personally, I feel as though science can be a compliment to religion, and that the scientific discoveries can and should be used to prove that God exists, not disprove it. If science did this, then the relationship between science and religion could be a friendly one. If that happened, people could stop debating and fighting over the two, allowing priests and scientists to talk and work together peacefully.
Up until the Enlightenment, mankind lived under the notion that religion, moreover intelligent design, was most likely the only explanation for the existence of life. However, people’s faith in the church’s ideals and teachings began to wither with the emergence of scientific ideas that were daringly presented to the world by great minds including Galileo and Darwin. The actuality that there was more to how and why we exist, besides just having an all-powerful creator, began to interest the curious minds in society. Thus, science began to emerge as an alternative and/or supplement to religion for some. Science provided a more analytical view of the world we see while religion was based more upon human tradition/faith and the more metaphysical world we don’t necessarily see. Today science may come across as having more solid evidence and grounding than religion because of scientific data that provides a seemingly more detailed overview of life’s complexity. “Einstein once said that the only incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible” (Polkinghorne, 62). Yet, we can still use theories and ideas from both, similar to Ian Barbour’s Dialouge and Integration models, to help us formulate an even more thorough concept of the universe using a human and religious perspective in addition to scientific data.