8 of 22

Write now Article Tools

Many years ago I read a book that opened up my eyes to the seemingly irreconcilable poles of science and religion. Alfred Whiteheads book, Science and the Modern World contained many interesting thoughts on the interactions and mindsets of the two sides of the debate but the passage that caught me was this one.

"When we consider what religion is for mankind and what science is, it is no exaggeration to say that the future course of history depends upon the decision of this generation as to the relationships between them."

Powerful thoughts indeed. Here we have possibly the two strongest general forces to influence man and those two forces seem to be totally set against each other. One the one hand we have religious intuitions and faith, the other accurate observation and logical deduction.

Even the late Pope John Paul II could see that "Science can purify religion from error and superstition. Religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes." Can one temper the other and find a way to co-exist peacefully. It is safe to say that the old warfare between the two sides has largely disappeared; creation versus evolution is no longer a major issue for most modern thinking people, no matter which camp they sit on. Similarly the shape of the earth and the structure of the heavens are also confined to medieval debates that are long forgotten. If these obvious stumbling blocks are long since left behind, why is there still this major rift?

This first type of problem, as mentioned above has been replaced by a different kind. To our generation it is not so much a question of specific contradictory teachings as of what seems to be incongruous attitudes and feelings, and conflicting purposes and goals. These difficulties, I suggest, rise from widespread misunderstanding as to the actual nature of science and religion, of their basic objectives and the methods they employ to achieve these, of their attitudes toward truth and freedom of inquiry, and toward the needs of mankind.

These misunderstandings come from the stereotypical image each has of the other. Religion is said to have rigid creeds to which one must ascribe, whereas sciences does not. Religion is allegedly authoritarian, demanding unquestioning orthodoxy, whereas science is free, recognising neither orthodoxy nor heresy. We are informed that the authority of religion stems fundamentally from so-called "revelation" a mysterious process by which god is said to have transmitted knowledge, contained in an inerrant bible, that is unattainable by ordinary means, while science is based on evidence and reason, without appeal to anything so meaningless as revelation. No wonder they seem mutually exclusive.

The truth is though that whilst fundamentalists on both sides might view their world in such stereotypical ways for the most part these are gross generalisations and the sooner we realise that the better. We need to educate not only both camps of the importance of the other and also show those in between that the two are not only compatible but in the right mix beneficial to the future of mankind. Instead of Intelligent design and cold science we need intelligent debate and warm understanding between the two. There is a future for the two to combine in a vital role, for the betterment of mankind, I just hope that it is not too late for us to realise.

Learn more about this author, Dave Franklin.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Science vs. religion: Understanding the differences?
We want to hear your view. Write now!