Are Religion and Science in Conflict?– Science and God
Does belief in God get in the method of science? The idea that science and faith are inevitably in dispute is a popular method of believing today.
PragerU is experiencing severe censorship on Big Tech platforms. Go to https://www.prageru.com/ to view our videos devoid of censorship!
SUBSCRIBE https://www.prageru.com/join/
Take PragerU videos with you everywhere you go. Download our totally free mobile app!
Download for Apple iOS ➡ https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/prageru/id1115115779
Download for Android ➡ https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.cappital.prageru
To see the FACTS & SOURCES and Transcript, check out: https://www.prageru.com/video/are-religion-and-science-in-conflict-science-and-god
Join PragerU’s text list! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru
Love PragerU? Visit our shop today!
Script:
Can you think in God and science at the very same time?
So-called “New Atheists” like Richard Dawkins and clinical materialists like Neil deGrasse Tyson definitely do not believe so. To them, religion gets in the way of science. In their view, more science causes less God..
This is not a new position. It was first revealed over a hundred years back by English physician John Draper in a book titled, A History of the Conflict Between Religion and Science..
Draper, who was deeply affected by Darwin’s then-new theory of advancement, related to arranged faith as an existential and direct risk to the improvement of science.
So, are science and religious beliefs inevitably in conflict? Have they always been?
Well, not precisely.
In truth, the giants who established modern science– astronomer Johannes Kepler, chemist Robert Boyle, physicist Sir Isaac Newton and others– were deeply religious guys. They didn’t see any dispute between science and faith. On the contrary: they believed that by doing science, they were finding God’s design and exposing it to mankind.
Undoubtedly, it’s no exaggeration to state that the Judeo/Christian religious custom led straight to contemporary science..
To support this claim, Cambridge University historian of science Joseph Needham positioned a well-known “Why there? Why then?” concern.
Why there– in Europe. Why then– in the 16th and 17th centuries.
Why didn’t modern-day science start somewhere else before then?
The Egyptians erected pyramids..
The Chinese created the block-printing, gunpowder, and compass..
Romans built splendid roadways and aqueducts..
The Greeks had fantastic philosophers..
Yet none of these cultures developed the systematic techniques for investigating nature that arose in Western Europe during the 16th and 17th centuries.
This awareness led Needham and other historians of science such as Ian Barbour and Herbert Butterfield to search for some other “X element” to describe why “the scientific transformation” took place where and when it did..
Here is the conclusion they reached:.
Just the Judeo-Christian West had the needed “intellectual presuppositions” to enable “the increase of science.”.
So, what were those presuppositions?
We can determine three. All find their origin in the Judeo-Christian idea of a Creator God who made a purchased universe..
The creators of contemporary science assumed the intelligibility of nature– that nature had been developed by the mind of a reasonable God, the exact same God who likewise made the reasonable minds of human beings..
Hence, these men presumed that if they used their minds to carefully study nature, they might understand the order and style that God had actually put in the world.
Second, they assumed a hidden order in nature..
This was best expressed by philosopher Alfred North Whitehead who argued, “There can be no living science unless there is a prevalent instinctive conviction in the … Order of Nature”– a conviction he attributed to belief in “the rationality of God.”.
This concept resulted in the extraordinary use of mathematics to explain the organized procedures at work worldwide, and inspired the innovation of better instruments, such as telescopes and microscopic lens, to see that order.
And 3rd, these creators of contemporary science presupposed the contingency of nature. This merely implies that God had numerous choices about how to make an orderly world.
Simply as there are many methods to develop a clock, there were lots of manner ins which God might have created deep space. To find how He did, researchers might not simply deduce the order of nature by presuming what appeared most logical to them; that is, simply utilizing factor alone to draw conclusions, as the Greek philosophers had tried to do..
For the total script in addition to FACTS & SOURCES, visit https://www.prageru.com/video/are-religion-and-science-in-conflict-science-and-god.
source
Does belief in God get in the method of science? The idea that science and faith are undoubtedly in dispute is a popular way of thinking today. To them, religious beliefs gets in the way of science. They didn’t see any dispute between science and faith. On the contrary: they believed that by doing science, they were finding God’s style and exposing it to mankind.
