Faith Vs. Fact: Why Science And Religion Are Incompatible By Coyne

1717 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Integration between science and religion

In the book, Faith vs. Fact: Why Science and Religion Are Incompatible by Coyne, he explains how religion and science do not go hand in hand at all. He explains that there are many differences between the two fields but holds science as the upper hand between the two. In chapter two of the book, he explains how religion mostly believes all of their doctrines and faith-driven information to be true and all other types of information false. He claims that science is much more focused on the “truth about the universe.” As a scientist himself, he has experienced first hand as to how science is nowhere compatible with religion and that science and religion have different goals, which can never intertwine. Coyne exemplifies that with science, …show more content…

Coyne describes that religion has three qualities: theism, moral system, and supernatural agent. With the claim of theism, he explains that God is always in contact with the world. With this notion, he understands that religion has one God in which watches everything that his followers perform in and proceeds to reward or punish their behavior. The second characteristic is the institution of a moral system. Considering this, Coyne depicts that based on the reward and punishment system based on behavior, religion is to believe that there are certain actions in which God considers to be right or wrong. This is a major component of most religious practices. The third feature is the interpersonal relationship with God. By making wrong decisions, we are spared from our wrongdoing by having an association with God. With these three components, Coyne defines religion. Now with this information, he dissects religion and tries to determine if religion looks for truth, similar to the field of science. In his findings he has concluded that theologians believe that the existence of God is indeed considered factual information. When pressed on this issue for evidence, many theologians claim that God cannot be described and is …show more content…

I believe that religion should not be considered the basis of reality since it is highly faith-based. People have different beliefs and that provides multiple versions of how they interpret their reality. I also feel that the “truth” that religion tends to glorify is not the truth because of its lack of empirical claims. In accordance to science, on the other hand, it is heavily evidence based. With science, we understand that it is solely based on observation. The theories and phenomenon that we know of today are solely from observation. Without this characteristic, we wouldn’t have an understanding on the universe and reality. Another characteristic that is quite important in science is that science is open to falsification. Scientists understand that they want to find the truth with different phenomenon. They also understand that they cannot find the absolute truth. Scientists always change their findings as new findings are being collected. Thirdly, it rejects faith as a method of evidence. Faith is based on ones’ belief on a specific subject matter. Science is not based on belief but on finding the truth. Scientists occasionally doubt their findings or evidence in order to find more concrete evidence. On the side of religion, it is primarily faith based. Most of the characteristics that science accept, religion denies. First off,

Show More
Related

  • Summary Of Jane Goodall's In The Forests Of Gombe

    1336 Words  | 3 Pages

    There are some theories that science cannot prove. Science explains all of the logical and natural things in life through observation and experimentation. Religion explains all of the spiritual and mystical things in life. Religion is the belief and worshipping of a supernatural force like God. Jane Goodall is an outlier in the science industry. She believes in God and is also a scientist. Most scientists are only agnostic or atheists. Scientists only have one viewpoint. They only think logically and try to prove the existence of things. Religious people believe in a higher power that created everything and control everything. Jane Goodall has the perfect philosophy. When science is the only “window” someone bases their life on, there are drawbacks because there are a lot of things science cannot explain, logically. When religion is the only “window” someone bases their life on, there are drawbacks because there are a lot of things religion cannot explain, spiritually. When a person bases their life on both science and religion, more mysteries are answered. When both science and religion is part of a person’s philosophy, there are no drawbacks because they either support each other’s claims, do not explain each other, or supports one but not the

    Read More

  • Summary Of Andy Crouch Delight In Creation

    266 Words  | 1 Pages

    Science and faith are generally viewed as two topics that do not intermingle. However, Andy Crouch’s work, Delight in Creation, suggests that there is an approach to both faith and science that allows support of scientists in the church community. There is an approach that can regard science as a career that can reflect the nature of God.

    Read More

  • The Influence Of William James On Religion

    813 Words  | 2 Pages

    In William James” Lecture XX, conclusions” he has argued on various aspects of “Religion”. The whole concept of religion seems to be in accordance to the facts of mankind’s biological operation, still according to him its doesn’t makes it true. Universe itself has a very strong connection to religion of any kind. Nature of Universe is interconnected to human spirit and to the existence of God. James states that “Visible world is part of a more spiritual universe from which it draws its chief significance”, which means that Universe relationship with the religion can be seen through the connection of human and religion. Religion is practically all-inclusive foundation in human culture. It is found in all social orders, over a wide span of time. All the

    Read More

  • Comparing God, Science And Imagination By Wendell Berry

    1570 Words  | 4 Pages

    It can also be opinionated. Scientists observe and experiment in order to prove or disprove something. Religionists only have to believe and put faith into God. Sometimes religion and science are exclusive to each other because they have a different perspective on certain topics. For example, scientists claim that it was the Big Bang that created the universe.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Christopher Hitchens On Science Vs. Religion

    995 Words  | 2 Pages

    Christopher Hitchens took a very one-sided approach to the idea of science and religion co-existing. In his work, “Does science make belief in God obsolete?” he made various attempts to poke fun at the concept of religion in modern times. However, the one that stuck out to me the most was when Hitchens said “It is how we came up with answers before we had any evidence. It belongs to the terrified childhood of our species, before we knew about germs or could account for earthquakes. It belongs to our childhood, too, in the less charming sense of a demanding a tyrannical authority: a protective parent who demands compulsory love even as he exacts a tithe of fear.” (4). Religion was a method of our predecessors to give answer the questions they couldn’t solve, and give a purpose to life. But, I believe it is an outdated method since science has become commonplace after 1832.

    Read More

  • Dennett And Plantinga's Essay: Are Science And Religion Compatible?

    1740 Words  | 4 Pages

    The title of the book is misleading. Are science and religion compatible? Dennett and Plantinga both agreed that contemporary evolutionary theory is compatible with theistic belief, but Dennett believed that the probability is very low. The main argument turned out to be about Plantinga’s EAAN. Plantinga tried to argue that God could have guided evolution while Dennett believed evolution was unguided. Plantinga’s argument had five premises. He described that P is probability, R is the proposition that cognitive faculties are reliable, N is naturalism, and E is current evolutionary theory (17).

    Read More

  • Religion And Science : The Scarlet Letter

    1374 Words  | 3 Pages

    As said by Yale professor of psychology and cognitive science, "Religion and science will always clash." Science and religion are both avenues to explain how life came into existence. However, science uses evidence collected by people to explain the phenomenon while religion is usually based off a belief in a greater power which is responsible for the creation of life. The characters Arthur Dimmesdale and Roger Chillingworth in Nathaniel Hawthorne 's novel, The Scarlet Letter, represent religion and science, respectively, compared to the real world debate between science and religion. Roger Chillingworth is a physician who is associated with science. (ch. 9; page 107) "...made [Roger Chillingworth] extensively acquainted with the medical science of the day... Skillful men, of the medical and chirurgical profession, were of rare occurrence in the colony...They seldom... partook of the religious zeal that brought other emigrants across the Atlantic." The people of the Puritan community traveled across the Atlantic for religious reasons, and because men affiliated with medical science did not tend to practice religion, they rarely inhabited this community. Chillingworth, falling under the category of "skillful men of the medical and chirurgical profession," would not be expected to reside in this community. The narrator through emphasizes this with his rhetorical questioning, "Why, with such a rank in the learned world, had he come hither? What could he, whose sphere was in great cities, be seeking in the wilderness?" These questions demonstrate that it was so strange for Chillingworth to appear in this community because of his association with science. Perhaps, the phrase "with such rank in the learned world" could yield the narra...

    Read More

  • Hostilities Between Men of Faith and Science

    747 Words  | 2 Pages

    When Copernicus and Galileo voiced their observations opposing the Catholic Church, Copernicus and Galileo were labeled as a threat for a couple reasons. For example, Copernicus and Galileo’s observations did not support the Catholic Church’s teachings. Copernicus and Galileo discovered that the sun does not revolve around the Earth but that the Earth revolves around the sun. The Church believed that “Only God knows how he created the universe,” (Gascoigne) so there was no way that Copernicus and Galileo could know that the Earth revolves around the sun. In the Bible it says, “The world also is stablished, and it cannot be moved.” (The Book) This was interpreted by the Church to mean that Earth cannot move, therefore the sun must be moving. About this matter, Leo XIII stated, “Truth cannot contradict truth, and we may be sure that some mistake has been made either in the interpretation of the sacred words, or in the polemical discussion itself,” which, in turn lead the Church believe that Copernicus and Galileo were heretics (Breshears). Also, Copernicus and Galileo’s observations were different than what the Church, its followers, and the rest of the world were used to. Aristotle, an influential Greek philosopher, had taught that the Earth was stationary and, for 1,800 years, it was common belief (Miller). No one had enough courage to risk the Catholic Church’s wrath and provide new ideas about the universe until Copernicus in 1543 (Miller). In conclusion, the Church had reason to consider Copernicus and Galileo as threats.

    Read More

  • Religion: Christian Science

    1387 Words  | 3 Pages

    Christian Science is an idealistic and most radical form of transcendental religiosity. The study of Christian Science teaches a feeling of understanding of God's goodness and the differences between good and evil, life and death. The purpose of this paper is to address how the study of Christian Science helps us better understand the impact of globalization in America, as well as the impact of American on globalization. This paper is important because globalization features a dominant worldview. All throughout the world people believe, study and teach different types of religious movements that impact others. People need to better understand how certain religions modify, conflict with, and impact the world. First, it will discuss the life and work of the founder, Mary Baker Eddy. Secondly, it will examine the primary rituals and religious services of the Christian Science movement. Then, it will outline the precursors and history of the religion. In the conclusion, a response will be offered to the question of how Christian Science helps us better understand the impact of globalization on America and of America on globalization.

    Read More

  • Religious Faith vs Science and Reason

    1423 Words  | 3 Pages

    Throughout history, conflicts between faith and reason took the forms of religion and free thinking. In the times of the Old Regime, people like Copernicus and Galileo were often punished for having views that contradicted the beliefs of the church. The strict control of the church was severely weakened around the beginning of the nineteenth century when the Old Regime ended. As the church's control decreased, science and intellectual thinking seemed to advance. While the people in the world became more educated, the church worked harder to maintain its influential position in society and keep the Christian faith strong. In the mid-nineteenth century, the church's task to keep people's faith strong became much harder, due to theories published by free thinkers like Charles Darwin, Charles Lyell, David Friedrich Strauss, and others. These men published controversial theories that hammered away at the foundation on which the Christian church was built. As the nineteenth century progressed, more doubts began to arise about the basic faiths of the Christian church.

    Read More

  • Compare and Contrast of Stephen Jay Gould and Richard Dawkins´s Points of View on Science and Religion

    1095 Words  | 3 Pages

    “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.”

    Read More

  • Comparing Paul Tillich's The Meaning And End Of Religion

    1203 Words  | 3 Pages

    According to scientists, religion is considered a gift from the human spirit and society is what makes up the whole perception of religion. Society is scared of the unknown and thinks about the different perspectives and conceptions of every religion out there. On the other hand, theologists consider religion a gift of the divine spirit, that there is something bigger out there. Religion is the ultimate concern and is the dimension of depth in our spiritual life such as our morals and aesthetic. Tillich states, “Religion is not a special function of man's spiritual life, but it is the dimension of depth in all of its functions”

    Read More

  • The Integration of Science and Religion

    3264 Words  | 7 Pages

    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...

    Read More

  • Physical Reality, Epistemology And Function Of Religion

    295 Words  | 1 Pages

    Scientists distinguish their work from religion by exploring physical reality, epistemology, methodology, and functions (Bethel, 2018). Scientists base their studies on physical matters or physical reality and religion based their studies on religious spiritual beliefs. Scientists can produce physical evidence of their studies and beliefs whereas religion requires faith and hope in what is considered truth since there is no evidence that can be examined and physically proven as fact. Scientists have different epistemology processes than religions. Scientific epistemology, or knowledge foundation, is based on the justification or proof of their beliefs through evidence and physical proof instead of relying on faith and revelations (Steup, 2018).

    Read More

  • The Relationship Between Science and Religion

    1381 Words  | 3 Pages

    First off, it is important to realize that religion and science have to be related in some way, even if it is not the way I mentioned before. If religion and science were completely incompatible, as many people argue, then all combinations between them would be logically excluded. That would mean that no one would be able to take a religious approach to a scientific experiment or vice versa. Not only does that occur, but it occurs rather commonly. Scientists often describe their experiments and writings in religious terms, just as religious believers support combinations of belief and doubt that are “far more reminiscent of what we would generally call a scientific approach to hypotheses and uncertainty.” That just proves that even though they are not the same, religion and science have to be related somehow.

    Read More

More about Faith Vs. Fact: Why Science And Religion Are Incompatible By Coyne

Open Document