Is it okay to compare and contrast science and religion?

[Sushan Ekanayake]

Something that intrigues me is how often people forget that science and religion were not two separated things before. Instead, knowledge used to be monopolized by religious institutions and most scientists were somehow connected to them. Universities and schools were religious institutions, so such a radical separation (and even antagonism) is not innate to the concept of religious and scientific thought.

But on the other hand, there were few famous scientists, and there could have been many more infamous ones as well, that were punished by the church because their scientific findings, which we see today very much valuable, were not going along with the religious teachings. That will be the result of comparing them

[Sonya Nicolaidis]

Science seeks to prove or disprove everything though scientific means. There is little middle ground and scientific theories have to undergo stringent tests to be valid and accepted. On the other hand, so much of what religion teaches us is based on faith, and does not need proof to be accepted. It comes from the heart. I think in this regard, it is definitely fair to compare them and also contrast them, as long as we don’t lose sight of the differences between them and how each one appeals to different people.

[TishA13]

I think it's really important for people to be able to differentiate the two.

We wouldn't have the advances we have if it wasn't for science and math. But religion provides a mental comfort and motivation for people to accomplish various tasks in history.

I think the biggest issue is when people get hung up on certain religious beliefs that science contradicts. But really who knows what's happened in the past?

"Winners write history" people really need to remember that.

[zainherb]

The author uses her knowledge regarding quantum physics and other philosophical studies to challenge and see the true meaning of the religious teachings that the world has known and believed for decades.

But as far as we know, religious teachings are a set of beliefs that are based on various historical events, cultural values and even mythical stories. Some of these things cannot be either proved or neglected by either science or philosophy.

Considering that argument, is this okay to compare religions with science as the author has done via this book?

It depends on how you see it.

If you consider religious teaching to be based on culture and myths, then surely, it should be compared with science so rationality can prevail.

I however, see religion as based on faith in the unseen part of existence. The unseen part that cannot be measured by science as science is designed to measure only the seen world.

In this case, then , no, it makes no sense to compare religion with science, as even though they might agree in some ways, in many ways they won't agree. Mostly because science is incapable of seeing what religion shows.

Not necessarily referring to any one religion here, just in general.

[InStoree]

I thought it was more of plaiting of the two than a separation and comparison. Isn't God a scientist too? How else could He create such a fascinating Universe? How can He compare with Him? "Each entity in existence is created with the basic nature (essence) of God," as Dr. Hunt expressed.

[Jaidyn Taylor]

I think there’s room for science and religion. In my faith, we believe that God uses science to create the world. It didn’t just pop into existence...He used “science” to do so. I’m not explaining it properly but basically he doesn’t just use his “magic” to create and do all things. There’s room for both.

Maybe that is true. Maybe the God created the universe scientifically and later the scientists found that out. But that is yet to be proven. I agree that there is room for both, but in different paths and for different purposes

That’s the thing though. Religion isn’t supposed to be proven. It’s all based on faith. That’s why this whole conversation of religion and science working together is tough to explain because they’re so contradictory to one another. I have faith in my religion and also faith that God used science to help Him create the world. I can’t prove that he did though, and never will be able to. I believe that the patterns we see in nature are proof enough to me that there was divine intervention in the creation of the world, but that’s all speculation basically. Faith on my part that I believe God had a hand in things.

[jokinyo]

As far as i know religion is not to be compared to science because in religion there is to believe in a supreme being but since just a theory to be proved

[Sushan Ekanayake]

Science seeks to prove or disprove everything though scientific means. There is little middle ground and scientific theories have to undergo stringent tests to be valid and accepted. On the other hand, so much of what religion teaches us is based on faith, and does not need proof to be accepted. It comes from the heart. I think in this regard, it is definitely fair to compare them and also contrast them, as long as we don’t lose sight of the differences between them and how each one appeals to different people.

But the point is that they are different entities. Science is proven through experiments, but religion is not proven, but being believed. So we don't even know whether the religious teachings are scientifically valid. How can such different entities can be compared

[Sushan Ekanayake]

I think it's really important for people to be able to differentiate the two.

We wouldn't have the advances we have if it wasn't for science and math. But religion provides a mental comfort and motivation for people to accomplish various tasks in history.

I think the biggest issue is when people get hung up on certain religious beliefs that science contradicts. But really who knows what's happened in the past?

"Winners write history" people really need to remember that.

Both entities are needed since both serve the mankind in different ways but for a common goal, sustainability. But they are different. Religion targets heart but science targets brain. How can these two be compared

[Sushan Ekanayake]

The author uses her knowledge regarding quantum physics and other philosophical studies to challenge and see the true meaning of the religious teachings that the world has known and believed for decades.

But as far as we know, religious teachings are a set of beliefs that are based on various historical events, cultural values and even mythical stories. Some of these things cannot be either proved or neglected by either science or philosophy.

Considering that argument, is this okay to compare religions with science as the author has done via this book?

It depends on how you see it.

If you consider religious teaching to be based on culture and myths, then surely, it should be compared with science so rationality can prevail.

I however, see religion as based on faith in the unseen part of existence. The unseen part that cannot be measured by science as science is designed to measure only the seen world.

In this case, then , no, it makes no sense to compare religion with science, as even though they might agree in some ways, in many ways they won't agree. Mostly because science is incapable of seeing what religion shows.

Not necessarily referring to any one religion here, just in general.

Quite correct. Science speaks about practical things which we can see or feel. But religions talk about spiritual things which are mostly not seen or felt. So it is out of the scope of science. So these two are incomparable

[Wekesa Namuyonga]

Science and religion can never agree on the same this so comparing them can be somehow difficult. Let someone believe on either but he can't believe in both it is incompatible.

[ClaZig]

As far as i know religion is not to be compared to science because in religion there is to believe in a supreme being but since just a theory to be proved

But isn't science exactly that? We believe certain ideas until someone else comes up and proves them wrong. I would actually say the opposite: religion promises certainty and stability, while science is constantly changing and being refuted.

[car-mbz]

I think there is no problem in comparing and contrasting religion and science. A problem will arise only when one tries to discredit one using the other.

[Ndiviwe]

I think that both religion and science have all played an important role in the world and the development of humanity and civilization. I think it is unwise for us to hold one of these to a higher standing than the other or to compare them to each other because they are both important for the betterment of our lives.

[Maddie Atkinson]

As far as i know religion is not to be compared to science because in religion there is to believe in a supreme being but since just a theory to be proved

But isn't science exactly that? We believe certain ideas until someone else comes up and proves them wrong. I would actually say the opposite: religion promises certainty and stability, while science is constantly changing and being refuted.

But in a way, isn't religion beginning to be refuted? Beliefs are changing within religion, it's just the Church, in this context, that is refusing to adapt to that, which to an extent is causing more uncertainty and instability. Just a thought!