Is it okay to compare and contrast science and religion?

[CConfounded]

I prefer it when science and religion are compared. Religion is a human creation that has existed in numerous forms throughout the world. Studying the science behind different aspects of it can be fascinating. Meditating, which is a common Buddhist practice, is found to increase a human's lifespan by creating connections between telomeres in the brain. Science can look toward religion in order to learn more about the history of the world, as well as learn more about trends across humanity (e.g. animism).

[AbhyarnaAman]

Religion was developed based on some sort of science, I believe comparisons should be made to explain some of the things that have been forgotten by people or ignored. I appreciate author's intention here.

[Sushan Ekanayake]

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.

No one will just compare to see the similarities or differences between science and religion. Even not intended, such a comparison will discredit one side of the comparison depending on the beliefs of one who is doing comparison. On the other hand they are two different things which are incompatible for comparison. So I don't think such a comparison is a good idea

[Sushan Ekanayake]

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.

Yes, they both are important for the humankind, in their own ways. One is not superior to the other and they are not similar to each other as well. So a comparison between the two is incompatible as well as unnecessary, since the end result won't be a pleasant one

[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?

I think it's ok because knowledge is ok and can enrich our lives. But some of us (at least me) choose to separate them. I view religion as something faith-based, and no amount of research can change that. But, on the other hand, if some scientists managed to prove that only one religion is true, we would be looking at some serious sociopolitical conflict.

Many scientists have attempted to prove or disprove religious teachings and beliefs using scientific evidence for various reasons. Since the subject is prone to conflict, even such proof are not being equally accepted among the science community. So the best thing is to let them be as they were, since religion doesn't need any scientific proof and science doesn't need any backing from the religion

[Sushan Ekanayake]

I don't think it's fair to compare science and religions because they're two separate things. I feel like they can both coexist without discrediting one or the other.

Yes. Since both are equally needed for the mankind, the importance of one cannot be put down comparing it to the other. And also such a comparison is not healthy as it will only lead to conflict. So the best thing is to let them co-exist and if one wants, he/she can take a side and disregard the other, but as a personal preference

[Cynthia Olyy]

I used to think it's abnormal because things about God are spiritual, while science is physical until I read that the earth is God's. Everything should be able to prove his existence, and the good news is that it's been happening.

[K+SQUARE]

I think science and religion aren't all that mutually exclusive, just that the connecting dots between them are still a long way from being discovered. Therefore, I feel comparing and contrasting them moves us further along the line of connecting them.

[María Andrea Fernández Sepúlveda]

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?

I think it's ok because knowledge is ok and can enrich our lives. But some of us (at least me) choose to separate them. I view religion as something faith-based, and no amount of research can change that. But, on the other hand, if some scientists managed to prove that only one religion is true, we would be looking at some serious sociopolitical conflict.

Many scientists have attempted to prove or disprove religious teachings and beliefs using scientific evidence for various reasons. Since the subject is prone to conflict, even such proof are not being equally accepted among the science community. So the best thing is to let them be as they were, since religion doesn't need any scientific proof and science doesn't need any backing from the religion

I agree. But I guess we cant stop human curiosity. It's an innate trait of our species.

[Ffion_]

I feel like there just aren’t enough parallels between the two to properly compare and contrast them without controversy. Science is always used to discredit religion which just alienates the two from ever being able to coexist and be comparable.

[AngelicG]

The whole point of scientific research is to remove all subjectivity and bias when looking for proof. Whereas religion is all about your subjective experience of it. Once you start comparing religion and science, you start introducing all that subjectivity and bias into science. People ultimately end up interpretating facts the way they choose and end up proving what they already believe to be true, regardless of which side of the the coin they land. People wouldn't compare science and philosophy in the way they always compare science and religion.

[Eunice Geres]

science and religion are two different subjects used to explain things. I don't think it would be right to compare it to one another, that's one of the most common reasons of unintelligent debate.

[Maddie Atkinson]

science and religion are two different subjects used to explain things. I don't think it would be right to compare it to one another, that's one of the most common reasons of unintelligent debate.

Thing is though, science can be used to prove things that religion claims, as well as disprove. In a way, disproving things allows false information to be scrapped in religion, leaving the truth behind. I don't know if that makes sense?

[Ahbed Nadir]

I'm not sure they should be compared. They are directly in contrast with each other as science deals with logic whereas religion is based off on belief.

[Sushan Ekanayake]

I think it's ok for some extent. Religion is someone's personal faith. But if you want the proof for what your religion says, then you can definitely go for science.

Yes you can go towards science to find proof for your religious beliefs. But there is no guarantee that it will always prove your beliefs. What if the religion is disproved? So a comparison between this two doesn't always go well