Are Science and Religion in Conflict? Essay

Indeed,a participation does go betwixt learning and devotion thus far the mesh is base on the leave fall(a) out of word meaning and vast misconceptions which members of either side atomic number 18 unwilling to let go of. The deviation in the midst of cognition and worship exists because in that respect is a lack of congruence surrounded by the results achieved through scientific discovery and the beliefs requisite by a worship to follow. This has giddy-emitting diode to the formation of 2 extremes i. e. either simulate faith and the doctrines required by faith to be observed or bring the rational methodologies of noesis.In an article published by The Atlantic, the compose is of the trust that solving the riddle that creates the engagement amongst lore and holiness is of utmost immensity for the current generation. This is because of the fountain that these two schools of suasion be the most influential forces and overstep the conduct we live o ur lives (Alfred). accomplishment and holiness since their inception have been in a state of continuous using. moreover this give wayment has been in the opposite direction i. e. nitially attainment studied the literature provided by organized ghostly belief provided with the development of scientific look, current(a) unearthly concepts remained un boot outn because they were considered Abstract by acquirement. This has led to people stimulateing cardinal side to be true and the new(prenominal) false (Alfred). There is a counterpoint between science and worship still this is because of the item that people ar hesitant to study two and stick to unity side. This has led to the permanent housing of misconceptions in the minds of people and is attaching fuel to the fire i. e. change magnitude the contest between the two slip bureau of c arer.The major reason behind the contravention between science and religion is the lack of acceptance of conclusions r s eparatelyed by either science or religion regarding a detail matter. If science put more light on the topic under news, ghostly scholars would deny those facts based on the grounds that the question is blasphemous and contradicts basic sacred principles. An article by the Times clip states the Christian Church and other religions including Islam rivet on key aspects of forgiving runner appearance such as the possession of a concord by every forgiving cosmosness or the miracles performed by saints and manpower of God. attainment however focalizati unitarys on new ways of quantifying and measuring valet evolution both the concepts create a conflict (Dan, 2006). Science has been up to(p) to prove the physical existence of emotions such as passion, anger by locating it in antithetic parts of the intellect. This contradicts with the principle followed by most religions regarding the presence of a spirit in every human and how that mind is free from bodily function s etc.However acceptance of this is denied by unearthly scholars based on the grounds that the concept of the season to come is fundamental to most religions and the concept of the soul is greatly in congruence with the afterlife (Dan, 2006). Scientific research should not be viewed as a threat to the basics of a religion quite the studies should be perceived as being insightful i. e. the research further clarifies religious concepts rather than denouncing them. There are certain impulsive factors that govern the existence and acceptance of the conflict between science and religion.Upbringing, Education and kind port are some of the factors that cartroad to people in both the scientific and religious communities to accept that on that point then is a rift between science and religion. In an article by Elaine Howard of sift University and Jerry Z. Park of Baylor University, they provided the results of a study they carried out which involved the selection of 21 Ameri shad ower scientists who were considered to be among the elite of the time. They studied their military position towards religion and deduced that all scientists i. e. hether a natural scientist or social scientist, have different take aims of acceptance towards the conflict that exists between science and religion. The acceptance is continueed by their socialisation and extent of religious practice (Ecklund&type Aamp Park, 2009). Since everyone needs some subject to believe in, scientists who do not belong to a stringent religious background readily accept the conflict since they have devoted their life to one particular school of thought. This experience is formed after extensive research based on rational view and seeking proof of everything which makes scientists so atheistic close religious beliefs.Among scientists however at that place is a lack of acceptance towards a religion thus far if he/she is a believer. This is because of the perceived pressure they would receive if their peers in the scientific community were to discover this fact (Elaine, 2010). The only way to resolve the conflict is to accept religious diversity as rise as the free discussion of scientific concepts without being judged as being blasphemous. It is through this open discussion that the mis tastes that exist between scholars of both extremes be cleared.The ways the scientific concepts are taught in schools are one of the major causes of the conflict. Since the memorizeers do not have clear fellowship and agreement of the scientific concepts, they pass on incompetent breeding to the students att end. In an article named specialiseoff Year College Students Conflict with religion and Science issued by the Georgia State University, the author tells us that it is in the human nature to perceive oneself to be amend than the rest. The ecumenical public tends to interpret and create their hold perceptions regarding scientific concepts and religious beliefs.The self-in terpretations fit to misconceptions which are major cause of the rift that exists between science and religion (Martin, 2008). The schools and teachers indoors those schools teach in a manner that fixes and restricts the brain of the student to think beyond what is thought. The starchy concepts become permanent with the passage of time which leads to the rejection of anything other than the closely held concepts. Science and religion develop over time, sometimes even complimenting each other. If a clear grounds of the advancements would not be obtained, there would invariably be room for misinterpretations.Therefore to look at the conflict at an elementary stage, teachers should get ahead students to interpret scientific research however they should know what is right and what is not in order to correct the misconceptions when they arise. An Evangelist is a person who preaches faith based on his or her own perception about the beliefs fundamental to the faith. Christian gos pellers have eternally been skeptical towards scientific concepts as well as theological theories about the induction of the world. Amos Yong carried out an analysis of various literary works related to the explanation of the conflict paradigm between science and religion.The findings were summarized in the article named Science and Religion Introducing the Issues, entryway the Debates A review essay and think primarily on discovering ways to align the methods of the church with scientific methodologies (Yong, 2011). The study set various conceptual frameworks that could be pick out which would align the thought process of the evangelist with scientific methodologies. Other measures that could be select include targeting the people lower in the hierarchy at the church. These people could be taught the concepts of science and how science rear end soften explain religion (Yong, 2011).The only way to resolve the conflict that exists for evangelists is to align their religious beliefs with rational scientific methods. Since an evangelist is a strict believer in faith, the beliefs would always be fundamental however damp scientific knowledge provide suffice bridge the differences. Science is based on methods and the rationale behind every phenomenon. Religion however on the other go by requires the believer to keep faith in the fundamental principles. Both present a different picture of the same thing and it is this difference in perception that has develop a conflict between science and religion.Science and Religion are two sides of the same coin. These two schools of thoughts add to each other rather than diverging. Religious concepts such as cleanity abide be get out understood through scientific research which helps understand and adhere to religion better. There is a connection of knowledge between science and religion which if built is in the favor of the future of the human race. Science and religion have a point where the two schools of t houghts suffer. One of the points is calibre of being religious.Although scientists work on the background of rationality, they still have a spiritual side which allows them to keep faith tour exploring the horizons of science and reason. In an article name Science vs. Religion What Scientists Really imagine, the author Elaine Ecklund states that even atheists have a certain level of spiritualism within them. The spirituality may not unavoidably be associated with keeping faith however there is a curiosity regarding the keister and formation of our plant and existence (Elaine, 2010). The spiritual side within scientists is promoted by their nurture and education.The spiritual side makes them interested in religious beliefs. by their scientific progress and belief in religious concepts, it makes it easier for them to centralize on scientific research and proving religious concepts to be accurate (Elaine, 2010). Therefore spirituality leads to a better scientific reaso ning approach to be adopted. Through religious involvement scientific research laughingstock be refined and complex questions can be answered. Morality and reality go hand in hand. Morality is the set of values and attitudes that are generally acceptable by a particular troupe for a particular moment in time.Religion requires a greater focus on displaying moral behavior. Morality can be better displayed by understanding reality and how it is affected by moral sentiment. Morality is required by religion whereas reality is explained by science proving that there is a deeper link rather than a conflict. Through scientific reasoning we are able to deduce the right way to behave in a society. These studies can help assess what moral behavior is. The article Religion vs. Science outlines the scientific efforts to better understand moral behavior which helps us adhere to religious principles in a better way (Honner, 1994).Science is able to study all factors that affect behavior includ ing societal norms, environmental conditions and person-to-person feelings. By quantifying morality, we are able to develop a better understanding of what constitutes morality. This indicates that the kindred between science and religion is one of clarification rather than a ascendent of conflict (Honner, 1994). Therefore rather than thinking about a conflict being in existence, we should follow the results of scientific research and studies to better clarify religious beliefs.Through scientific research we are able to uncover and understand the abstract concepts that religion defines. Queries about our existence can be answered by a careful examination of religious concepts complimented with a fundamental scientific analysis. In an article name God, creation, science, religion the conflicts by Tom Chivers, the author tells us that scientist in order to deduce the existent age of the Earth moved to religious transcripts appearing in the Bible. Although the Bible did not provid e dates however did contain information on the characteristics of the people at the time.This was a major input in the scientific breakthrough (Tom, 2009). The scientific declarations cannot be denied as they have been institutional to the development of the knowledge and understanding regarding the universe. By further considering the magnificence of religion we would come across certain questions that have been yet to be answered by scientific research. Through this connection we can uncover various mysteries concerning the universe and everything within it (Tom, 2009). People should develop a thorough understanding of the concepts of both extremes.Through this understanding we would be able to develop a much better connection between science and religion and resolve all mysteries which would give us a better understanding of who we are and why we exist. Referring to the first counter argument, it states that science and religion converge because a level of spirituality exists be tween the followers of the two extremes. The argument is refuted by the original dissertation stating that although the spiritual level does exist however this would not lead to the convergence of ideas arising within the two schools of thoughts.The reason behind it is the fact that there is a lack of acceptance of conclusions by scholars of both the extremes leading to a never ending conflict. Referring to the second counter argument, it states that science and religion add to each other in way that science leads to a better understanding of moral behavior which is a pre-requisite for religious believers. However the original thesis refutes this argument by saying that although the concepts add to each other however there are vast misconceptions in the minds of the followers of both science and religion.These misconceptions come in the middle and cause the conflict to tense up rather than reaching a resolving point. Referring to the final counter argument, it states that there i s no conflict between the fields because religious beliefs and knowledge acts as a basis of scientific research and discovery. This argument is challenged by the original thesis in a manner that although this can be the quality however people classify themselves as being either religious or scientific. Due to this classification, the connection between science and religion cannot be established.