• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Should there be harmony between science and religion?

Are religion and science in harmony?


  • Total voters
    46

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
When should science be chosen over religion? If science has one conclusion and religion has another at what point do we accept science over religion? One view is that we should always believe science, even if it contradicts our most cherished religious beliefs. Another perspective is we should never abandon the 'truth' even though science appears to have completely proven our religious belief wrong. For many of us the truth will lie in between. We may believe in a God or gods that have the power to overcome the laws of the natural world.

The Baha'i perspective tends to favour science over religion but there are always exceptions.

God has endowed man with intelligence and reason whereby he is required to determine the verity of questions and propositions. If religious beliefs and opinions are found contrary to the standards of science they are mere superstitions and imaginations; for the antithesis of knowledge is ignorance, and the child of ignorance is superstition. Unquestionably there must be agreement between true religion and science. If a question be found contrary to reason, faith and belief in it are impossible…
Abdu’l-Baha

Religion and Science are inter-twined with each other and cannot be separated. These are the two wings with which humanity must fly. One wing is not enough. Every religion which does not concern itself with science is mere tradition…. Therefore science, education and civilization are most important necessities for the full religious life. – Abdu’l-Baha

So where does the balance lie for you? What would you never give up from your religion and when would you defer to science instead? Are religion and science in harmony or are they fundamentally opposed and contradictory?

Thank you for your comments.
 

Jumi

Well-Known Member
Science is a lot like swimming. You don't need religion to swim and there's not really any religion that makes you a better swimmer. If you want to swim and the best known way to do so is against some teaching, then you'll find it more difficult to be a good swimmer.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
“If scientific analysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain claims in Buddhism to be false, then we must accept the findings of science and abandon those claims.” -- Dalai Lama XIV

I think when religion strays too far from science, it becomes dangerous.

Buddhism tends to be much more at ease with its own contradictions that its Abrahamic counterparts. It probable comes down to ideas about the Divine Revelation.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
Science is a lot like swimming. You don't need religion to swim and there's not really any religion that makes you a better swimmer. If you want to swim and the best known way to do so is against some teaching, then you'll find it more difficult to be a good swimmer.

I don't know. Many of the great philsophers and metaphysicists have been great swimmers, don't you think? Many scientists can be quite bland and simply imitators of what has gone before them. Innovation and creativity are the key and I would have thought both science the inspiration of genuine religion could contribute. Maybe I'm wrong.
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
When should science be chosen over religion? If science has one conclusion and religion has another at what point do we accept science over religion? One view is that we should always believe science, even if it contradicts our most cherished religious beliefs. Another perspective is we should never abandon the 'truth' even though science appears to have completely proven our religious belief wrong. For many of us the truth will lie in between. We may believe in a God or gods that have the power to overcome the laws of the natural world.

The Baha'i perspective tends to favour science over religion but there are always exceptions.

God has endowed man with intelligence and reason whereby he is required to determine the verity of questions and propositions. If religious beliefs and opinions are found contrary to the standards of science they are mere superstitions and imaginations; for the antithesis of knowledge is ignorance, and the child of ignorance is superstition. Unquestionably there must be agreement between true religion and science. If a question be found contrary to reason, faith and belief in it are impossible…
Abdu’l-Baha

Religion and Science are inter-twined with each other and cannot be separated. These are the two wings with which humanity must fly. One wing is not enough. Every religion which does not concern itself with science is mere tradition…. Therefore science, education and civilization are most important necessities for the full religious life. – Abdu’l-Baha

So where does the balance lie for you? What would you never give up from your religion and when would you defer to science instead? Are religion and science in harmony or are they fundamentally opposed and contradictory?

Thank you for your comments.
I do not cherish beliefs. I assess the outcomes from holding those beliefs and value the utility of holding them accordingly. Goes for everything, including scientific and religious beliefs. Thus, for me, any and all beliefs can be accepted or rejected at any time if they prove useful or not useful in making me a better person, a more capable person, and a happier more balanced person.
Thus I am unattached to beliefs...a principle about which both Hinduism, Buddhism and science agrees on. :D
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
When should science be chosen over religion? If science has one conclusion and religion has another at what point do we accept science over religion? One view is that we should always believe science, even if it contradicts our most cherished religious beliefs. Another perspective is we should never abandon the 'truth' even though science appears to have completely proven our religious belief wrong. For many of us the truth will lie in between. We may believe in a God or gods that have the power to overcome the laws of the natural world.

The Baha'i perspective tends to favour science over religion but there are always exceptions.

God has endowed man with intelligence and reason whereby he is required to determine the verity of questions and propositions. If religious beliefs and opinions are found contrary to the standards of science they are mere superstitions and imaginations; for the antithesis of knowledge is ignorance, and the child of ignorance is superstition. Unquestionably there must be agreement between true religion and science. If a question be found contrary to reason, faith and belief in it are impossible…
Abdu’l-Baha

Religion and Science are inter-twined with each other and cannot be separated. These are the two wings with which humanity must fly. One wing is not enough. Every religion which does not concern itself with science is mere tradition…. Therefore science, education and civilization are most important necessities for the full religious life. – Abdu’l-Baha

So where does the balance lie for you? What would you never give up from your religion and when would you defer to science instead? Are religion and science in harmony or are they fundamentally opposed and contradictory?

Thank you for your comments.
I will abandon something if I am unable to express my self and character and purposes and meanings through it. This holds from choosing (or abandoning) certain style of shoes to a certain worldview, lifestyle or religion.
 

Jumi

Well-Known Member
I don't know. Many of the great philsophers and metaphysicists have been great swimmers, don't you think? Many scientists can be quite bland and simply imitators of what has gone before them. Innovation and creativity are the key and I would have thought both science the inspiration of genuine religion could contribute. Maybe I'm wrong.
There isn't a necessary conflict. Some literalists do seem to carry a heavy stone with them, not the best thing going to a swim... Sometimes bland is the way to go if you want to be a top expert, we don't judge a chef's abilities by their other activities either.
 

Dawnofhope

Non-Proselytizing Baha'i
Staff member
Premium Member
I do not cherish beliefs. I assess the outcomes from holding those beliefs and value the utility of holding them accordingly. Goes for everything, including scientific and religious beliefs. Thus, for me, any and all beliefs can be accepted or rejected at any time if they prove useful or not useful in making me a better person, a more capable person, and a happier more balanced person.
Thus I am unattached to beliefs...a principle about which both Hinduism, Buddhism and science agrees on. :D

It certainly appears that Hindus, Buddhists and scientists are unattached to their beliefs. But how far does that really go? Is a Hindu free to incorporate Abrahamic like monotheism into some of their other traditions or would be be social pressures against such unholy mingling?

Psychiatry in my experience is a branch of medical science that can be as dogmatic in its supposedly enlightened biopsychosocial model of health but many psychiatrists are just opposed to any spiritual dimension as some theists are to scientific ideas.

In regards scientific advancement hasn't it largely been Christians and Jews that have been the innovators in science since the enlightenment?

So you may feel unattached and reassuredly superior in your Hindu/science beliefs but how free are you really from the contradictions that affect us all? :D
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
I dont see how there can be real harmony, the two are diametrically opposed in their ethos. All that is likely is tolerance of each other.
 

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
It certainly appears that Hindus, Buddhists and scientists are unattached to their beliefs. But how far does that really go? Is a Hindu free to incorporate Abrahamic like monotheism into some of their other traditions or would be be social pressures against such unholy mingling?

Psychiatry in my experience is a branch of medical science that can be as dogmatic in its supposedly enlightened biopsychosocial model of health but many psychiatrists are just opposed to any spiritual dimension as some theists are to scientific ideas.

In regards scientific advancement hasn't it largely been Christians and Jews that have been the innovators in science since the enlightenment?

So you may feel unattached and reassuredly superior in your Hindu/science beliefs but how free are you really from the contradictions that affect us all? :D
Lots of Hindus incorporate Jesus in their worship and frequently go to Dargah's of Sufi saints and mystics. You should read up on the Bauls of Bengal.
Baul - Wikipedia
Psychiatry is not yet a science. Its a science wannabe...like economics. :)
Any and every historical advancement happened somewhere and spread to other parts of the globe from there. Agriculture, Iron-working, domestication of horse, mathematics...you name it. Thus it is expected that people located geograpically closer to the center of the new innovation will master it first, before other groups further away adopts and masters it. Science is just like that in all respects. Here the current rankings in terms of scientific output. US, having the largest R&D budjet, still tops the list...but China is 2nd, Japan 5th and India 9th...which is excellent considering when India and China got their indepenence from colonization don't you think?
SJR - International Science Ranking
 

Marcion

gopa of humanity's controversial Taraka Brahma
I think that's true enough of Abrahamic religions, but I wouldn't say Buddhism, for instance, relies on revelation.
That is why I don't see Buddhism as a religion but as a socio-spiritual movement.
 

Earthling

David Henson
It's a difficult question. To science minded atheists science is fact, true, infallible, right, and religion is myth, false, fallacy, wrong. It's a dogmatic and political xenophobia. It's as ridiculous as saying if you like the color red you can't be a parent.

Science is the method of imperfect humans to gather information, to investigate how the world works or to make new things to use. Theoretic Science is almost always wrong. If you say the grass is green, all of us agreeing what green is and taking into consideration that it's a general statement, that sometimes grass is yellow, or to a color blind person, these might be exceptions, then science isn't speculating that grass is green or appears green to most of us, but why it is green.

Religion isn't speculating why grass is green or that it is green. They, religion and science, have little to nothing to do with one another.

If science tells me that there isn't a God, or that we weren't created by God it means nothing to me. But to a science minded atheist it is affirmation. If science tells me that there is a God and we were created by God it also means nothing to me. It's no more certain or knowledgeable than I am on the subject. It's meaningless. If religion tells me that science isn't true or correct on any given point it is also meaningless to me.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
Science relies on fact, experimentation and investigation. Most of religion is based on revelation.
Yes, they really are two different ways of investigating the nature of existence. So I see no problem in the fact that they might clash occasionally. Science is no more the 'fountain of truth' than religion is. And either of them is capable of encouraging self-delusion. However, too much disharmony and disunity can destroy us as individuals and as a society. So that when we do encounter clashes between the two, we should specifically try to avoid becoming entrenched in either one of them. As long as we maintain possession of our own open mind, we'll be OK with having opposing views of truth and reality being presented to us.
 

Earthling

David Henson
Science relies on fact, experimentation and investigation. Most of religion is based on revelation.

So a science minded atheist will rule out religion, even though religion can rely on those things as well.

The clash between science and religion began in the sixth century B.C.E. with the Greek mathematician and philosopher Pythagoras, whose geocentric view of the universe influenced ancient Greeks like Aristotle and Ptolemy. Aristotle's geocentric concept endured for 2,000 years, primarily as a philosophy and would have an influence in turn on the powerful Church of Rome. It was adopted by the church due to the scientist Thomas Aquinas (1225-74) who had great respect for Aristotle. In the book Galileo's Mistake, Wade Rowland wrote: "the hybridized Aristotle in the theology of Aquinas had become bedrock dogma of the Church of Rome."

Galileo's heliocentric concept challenged Aquinas' geocentric philosophy, and Galileo had the nerve to suggest that his heliocentric concept was in harmony with Scripture, a direct challenge to the Church itself, and so bringing about the Inquisition in 1633. It was Galileo's figurative, and accurate, interpretation of Scripture against Aquinas' and the Catholic Church's literal and inaccurate interpretation. For being right Galileo stood condemned until 1992 when the Catholic Church officially admitted to their error in their judgment of Galileo.

So the static between religion and science was caused by philosophy and religion wrongly opposed to science and the Bible.
 

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
to science minded atheists science is fact, true, infallible, right, and religion is myth, false, fallacy, wrong

Not so.
1 Not all scientists are atheist.
2 each atheist is an individual. The majority understand science is absolutely changeable by its very nature of continues evaluation, experimentation, observation.
3 unlike religion that is dogmatic unchanging.

But you confirmation bias is understood.
 
Top