Science Versus Religion: Different, But Connected

“Science without religion is lame, and religion without science is blind” is a famous quote by Albert Einstein. Throughout the years, people have believed that science and religion didn’t have anything in common at all, that science permits you to see what is proven day to day and that religion is based upon belief, belief in things that cannot be seen, but experienced. Society feels that this belief is only accepted by faith and spreads out because someone says it’s true. Over the years, science and religion were thought to be two different areas of knowledge, with different aspects, always seeming contradicting each other. However, time has passed and people are starting to realize that, the statement mentioned before may or may not be true, that science and religion may be more united than they had thought previously. In fact, we can describe them as different ways of looking at the world that complement each other instead of contradicting each other. Moreover, this idea is comparatively new and evolved due to adoption and acceptance of other perspectives from individuals. Majority of the society believes that, in order to believe in something, they need to understand not only the theory, but also the rationale behind it. When a claim or a new, relative thesis is made it has to be demonstrated to others in such a way that it can be understood by others. Although these demonstrations are proved scientifically, religion too plays a major role, as seen in the past (Islamic figures were responsible for very rapid progress in a number of scientific fields such as maths, medicine and architecture).

As quoted in the Quran, the Holy Bible and other sacred books, faith in rationality and the rationality in faith, are said to go hand in hand, which seemingly tend to define existence of this world. Hence rationality seems to comprehensibly reason. Any scientist, regardless of the period in which the lived, moreover, wouldn’t have made a scientific assumption or truth, without first believing in it. Philosophically, science is defined as knowing the truth. Therefore, longing to know the truth tends to correlate with ideas and principles that of religion. Religion teaches one to use their faith instead of using logic and knowledge; and science requires one to gain knowledge to understand the logic and rationality to understand the world. However, this only formulates the views of a few scientific leaders, important figures, and society but not the whole.

Few scientists such as Darwin, have mentioned in their books and articles why science and religion are not compatible and why they tend to draw different conclusions. They have drawn a conclusion that science and religion are actually incompatible, in the real world, because they reach incompatible conclusions. As quoted by Lawrence Krauss, “Perhaps the most important contribution an honest assessment of the incompatibility between science and religious doctrine can provide is to make it starkly clear that in human affairs — as well as in the rest of the physical world — reason is the better guide” tends to show the opinionated conclusions of a primarily minority of scientists. Moreover they are fixed with the opinion that religious communities convey absolute truthfulness of all statements recorded in the Bible and therefore creates an intervention of religion into the sphere of science. This seems to be both, accepted and rejected by society which yet can’t be determined based on majority and probably never will due to the differences in perspectives, understanding behind the rationality and logicality.

In conclusion, the quote may seem to be biased towards thinking of majority of people, it can however, be said that the topic still remains that of a highly debatable one. This is primarily because the differing beliefs of individuals in society. For example, I consider myself to be an atheist, merely because I don’t believe in the logicality behind religion and science, or in the existence of God. This again becomes an opinionated view because I as an individual, don’t believe in the moral principles of religion and this not by true for the entire society. However, this doesn’t mean that I can make a remark that tends to demeanour or disparage the principles of any religion, as I might not have the complete knowledge of any religion and hence, I don’t have the proper credentials to make a remark that might be for or against the ethics of any doctrine. Moreover, if I had made a remark, it would make me morally unjust. Therefore, even if an individual might have an opinionated view regarding the correlation of science vs religion, it would be morally just to be open minded, and to take in different perspectives, as may help the individual to deduce further conclusion that might support his/her view, or counter his/her view.