Are religion and science compatible?

[Estanglia]

Yes! Science cannot explain what happens to your consciousness when you die,

That depends on how you define consciousness and what you mean by "what happens to it when you die".

or why the laws of physics are what they are. You need religion to answer those.

Or philosophy.

Hell, even science might be able to tell us that.

[Cekoviu]

Really depends on the religion. Fundamentalist Abrahamic religions, no. Less literal interpretations could work.

[Greed and Death]

Science provides objective fact, religion provides subjective Truth.

[Nuroblav]

Yes! Science cannot explain what happens to your consciousness when you die,

It ceases to exist.

or why the laws of physics are what they are. You need religion to answer those.

Well no we don't actually.

[VoVoDoCo]

Religions like Buddhism actually encourage skepticism. All in all though, as a general rule of thumb, science and religion are not compatible.

[VoVoDoCo]

Science provides objective fact, religion provides subjective Truth.

Well, for one you don't need religion in order to believe that something is subjectively true. Two that's not the major issue here. The major issue is that religion often contradicts and negates subjective fact

*objective fact

[Greed and Death]

Science provides objective fact, religion provides subjective Truth.

Well, for one you don't need religion in order to believe that something is subjectively true. Two that's not the major issue here. The major issue is that religion often contradicts and negates subjective fact

Is fact Subjective ?

[VoVoDoCo]

Well, for one you don't need religion in order to believe that something is subjectively true. Two that's not the major issue here. The major issue is that religion often contradicts and negates subjective fact

Is fact Subjective ?

Sorry I edited it too late. Stupid voice to text

[VoVoDoCo]

.For example, in Christianity, one of the world's leading religions, the world was created by God in six days. On the other hand, the Big Bang theory, the leading scientific theory for the creation of the universe, states that the universe and all in it originated from an infinitely dense singularity which then expanded. Others argue that the two are completely compatible and may even benefit each other.

They are not compatible. The Bible claims that the Earth was formless and empty before there was light. Assuming that the light was the Big Bang, that would mean that the Earth was older than the Big Bang. Considering we're still finding rocks that are older than Earth, that doesn't add up.

They say that religion and science attempt to answer two different questions, "Why does the world exist?" and "How does the world exist?" respectively.

First of all, there's nothing objectively more profound about asking the question why as opposed to how. Second of all, just because the idea that there is no reason for our existence is uncomfortable and does not mean we need a imaginary being to give us meaning.

They point out that the religious have made many discoveries in science, such as the proposal of the Big Bang theory by a Belgian priest and the many discoveries of the Muslims during the Middle Ages.

The classic example is Newton. People will say, "Sure! Newton's groundbreaking work on physics are often used as a weapon against Christianity. The Newton was a Christian. So doesn't that lend Christianity some credibility?" Well not really. Newton also believed in the fountain of youth and alchemy. Just because he made a incredible scientific discovery does not mean that we can excuse his nonsense.

[Page]

Yes! Science cannot explain what happens to your consciousness when you die, or why the laws of physics are what they are. You need religion to answer those.

What happens to a fire when it has no more fuel to consume? It's gone. It ceases to exist. There is no more fire.

We know that consciousness is a result of a working brain and it is logical to infer that it cannot exist when that brain is destroyed.

[YouAreBastard]

Absolutely. Science is a method of understanding the natural world. Religion deals entirely with the supernatural. This doesn't make them opposed, they are just dealing with entirely separate matters.

From a Christian viewpoint, understanding the creation via science means a better understanding of the Creator. You study the painting to better understand the artist. Mathematics is highly appreciated as it is the reigning logic of the world. Everything conforms to mathematical realities. Everything can be explained via mathematics. This is one of the arguments for a Creator, that the applicability of mathematics means that we are NOT random and were in fact created with logic by a logical being.

Fedora atheists either don't know or pretend not to know that many notable scientists were/are devoutly religious. Leonardo Fibonacci, Isaac Newton, Johannes Kepler, Nicolaus Copernicus, Francis Bacon, John Dalton, JJ Thomson.... For crying out loud, the man who created the Big Bang Theory was a Catholic priest (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre).

Here's a generalized list from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christians_in_science_and_technology

[The Alma Mater]

Absolutely. Science is a method of understanding the natural world. Religion deals entirely with the supernatural. This doesn't make them opposed, they are just dealing with entirely separate matters.

From a Christian viewpoint, understanding the creation via science means a better understanding of the Creator. You study the painting to better understand the artist. Mathematics is highly appreciated as it is the reigning logic of the world. Everything conforms to mathematical realities. Everything can be explained via mathematics. This is one of the arguments for a Creator, that the applicability of mathematics means that we are NOT random and were in fact created with logic by a logical being.

Fedora atheists either don't know or pretend not to know that many notable scientists were/are devoutly religious. Leonardo Fibonacci, Isaac Newton, Johannes Kepler, Nicolaus Copernicus, Francis Bacon, John Dalton, JJ Thomson.... For crying out loud, the man who created the Big Bang Theory was a Catholic priest (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre).

Here's a generalized list from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christians_in_science_and_technology

And when devout christians like Georges Lemaître or Charles Darwin used science to posit theories that directly contradicted church doctrine.. did the Church thank them and adjust their religious texts ?

[VoVoDoCo]

Absolutely. Science is a method of understanding the natural world. Religion deals entirely with the supernatural. This doesn't make them opposed, they are just dealing with entirely separate matters.

From a Christian viewpoint, understanding the creation via science means a better understanding of the Creator. You study the painting to better understand the artist. Mathematics is highly appreciated as it is the reigning logic of the world. Everything conforms to mathematical realities. Everything can be explained via mathematics. This is one of the arguments for a Creator, that the applicability of mathematics means that we are NOT random and were in fact created with logic by a logical being.

Logic is man-made. Mathematics is how we quantifier observations. It doesn't matter how loud you say it oh, it doesn't prove that God created logic or math.

Fedora atheists either don't know or pretend not to know that many notable scientists were/are devoutly religious. Leonardo Fibonacci, Isaac Newton, Johannes Kepler, Nicolaus Copernicus, Francis Bacon, John Dalton, JJ Thomson.... For crying out loud, the man who created the Big Bang Theory was a Catholic priest (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre).

Read my new tonium examples from earlier. Just because Newton made a scientific discovery that was significant, that does not lend any credibility to his other beliefs, like the Fountain of Youth or Alchemy. The suggest that religion is different for some reason it's nothing more than special pleading

[Vivolkha]

While science can't (so far) disprove the existence of God(s), it has repeatedly contradicted multiple religious doctrines in key aspects (e.g. evolution, Earth is not flat). Religion can offer a philosophical interpretation of scientific discoveries but religions who claim faith-based so-called "truths" about the universe and science will frequently contradict each other and in this case, facts (i.e. not religion) shall prevail.

[The Alma Mater]

Except for one thing, if a religion just happens to be true, then that does not mean it is compatible with science, since science is not just about what you know but also about ho you came around to that knowledge and if you can support said knowledge through experimentation. Religions on the other hand tend not to change core beliefs, even if those beliefs are shown to be wrong because there is no method to testing or changing those core beliefs.
No, your religion did not make any discoveries, those who practiced your religion did, there is a difference.

I mis-worded that. People who have followed my religion have made discoveries, to be specific.

Technically correct. Do however note that Islam mostly served as a way to bring people together to exchange ideas when it was still new and fresh.
The longer Islam stayed, the less scientific discoveries it produced.

[Sundiata]

Yeah, being a Catholic, I can confirm that science and religion are compatible.

[Geneviev]

I don't know about every religion, but my church definitely isn't compatible with science. It depends how literally the Bible is interpreted.

[Salus Maior]

Yep. I see no contradiction between my faith and science.

[VoVoDoCo]

I mis-worded that. People who have followed my religion have made discoveries, to be specific.

Technically correct. Do however note that Islam mostly served as a way to bring people together to exchange ideas when it was still new and fresh.
The longer Islam stayed, the less scientific discoveries it produced.

Not to mention that the majority of the planet has been religious since ancient times. It was only a matter of time before Humanity started making discoveries, and statistically they were going to have to be made by religious before nobody at all. It doesn't give special Creedence to religious people, they were just statistically more likely to make the discoveries because they were more plentiful.

Not to mention as you or somebody else said, most major religions have made scientific contributions. So which one was divinely inspired?

[VoVoDoCo]

Yep. I see no contradiction between my faith and science.

The Bible says that bats are birds, that the Canaanites were completely eliminated despite genetic evidence of the contrary, that the sun revolves around the Earth, and the ants have no hierarchy. No contradictions between Christianity and science there?

[Napkizemlja]

In all of human history, religion and science are the two things that we resort to in order to find the answers to the world.

They seem at times to disagree with each other, prompting some to believe in the incompatibility of religion and science. For example, in Christianity, one of the world's leading religions, the world was created by God in six days. On the other hand, the Big Bang theory, the leading scientific theory for the creation of the universe, states that the universe and all in it originated from an infinitely dense singularity which then expanded.

Others argue that the two are completely compatible and may even benefit each other. They say that religion and science attempt to answer two different questions, "Why does the world exist?" and "How does the world exist?" respectively. They point out that the religious have made many discoveries in science, such as the proposal of the Big Bang theory by a Belgian priest and the many discoveries of the Muslims during the Middle Ages.

What do you think, citizens of NationStates? Are religion and science compatible? Tell us your opinion down below.

God creating, well, creation in six days is not supposed to be read literally but more as an extended metaphor and mythological narrative. So that in of itself shows that it's not impossible for religion and science to be reconciled, especially when many religious people and figures have no issues accepting the Big Bang.

[Cekoviu]

Yep. I see no contradiction between my faith and science.

The Bible says that bats are birds, that the Canaanites were completely eliminated despite genetic evidence of the contrary, that the sun revolves around the Earth, and the ants have no hierarchy. No contradictions between Christianity and science there?

Where'd you get the ant thing from?

[Deacarsia]

As a Catholic I believe that religion and science are compatible. God gave man reason for a reason.

[Deacarsia]

Asking if religion and science are compatible is like asking if biology and history are compatible. They're ultimately two different disciplines searching for two different things, though, with plenty of overlap. Furthermore, there are many differing schools of thought on how we should be religious, as there are different schools of thought on how we should be scientific. Some of them accept a greater overlap of the two than others.

I agree.

[Napkizemlja]

Yep. I see no contradiction between my faith and science.

The Bible says that bats are birds, that the Canaanites were completely eliminated despite genetic evidence of the contrary, that the sun revolves around the Earth, and the ants have no hierarchy. No contradictions between Christianity and science there?

Translations are not infallible. The Hebrew word that the KJV translated into "birds" can also be translated as "flying creatures" or even "insects". I'm pretty sure bats are flying creatures.