Are Religion and Science in Conflict?– Science and God
Does belief in God get in the approach of science? The idea that science and faith are undoubtedly in disagreement is a popular method of believing today.
PragerU is experiencing serious censorship on Big Tech platforms. Go to https://www.prageru.com/ to see our videos devoid of censorship!
SUBSCRIBE https://www.prageru.com/join/
Take PragerU videos with you all over you go. Download our completely 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, take a look at: https://www.prageru.com/video/are-religion-and-science-in-conflict-science-and-god
Sign up with PragerU’s text list! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru
Love PragerU? Visit our store 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 think so. To them, religious beliefs obstructs of science. In their view, more science triggers less God.
This is not a new position. It was first revealed over a century back by English doctor John Draper in a book entitled, A History of the Conflict Between Religion and Science.
Draper, who was deeply impacted by Darwin’s then-new theory of improvement, associated to organized faith as a direct and existential threat to the enhancement of science.
Are science and religious beliefs undoubtedly in dispute? Have they always been?
Well, not specifically.
In fact, the giants who developed contemporary science– astronomer Johannes Kepler, chemist Robert Boyle, physicist Sir Isaac Newton and others– were deeply spiritual guys. They didn’t see any conflict between science and faith. On the contrary: they believed that by doing science, they were discovering God’s design and exposing it to humanity.
Undoubtedly, it’s no exaggeration to state that the Judeo/Christian spiritual custom-made led straight to contemporary science.
To support this claim, Cambridge University historian of science Joseph Needham positioned a popular “Why there? Why then?” issue.
Why there– in Europe. Why then– in the 16th and 17th centuries.
Why didn’t modern-day science start elsewhere before then?
The Egyptians set up pyramids.
The Chinese created the gunpowder, block-printing, and compass.
Romans built splendid roadways and aqueducts.
The Greeks had fantastic thinkers.
Yet none of these cultures developed the methodical strategies for investigating nature that emerged in Western Europe during the 17th and 16th centuries.
This awareness led Needham and other historians of science such as Ian Barbour and Herbert Butterfield to look for some other “X component” to explain why “the scientific transformation” happened where and when it did.
Here is the conclusion they reached:.
Simply the Judeo-Christian West had the required “intellectual presuppositions” to make it possible for “the increase of science.”.
What were those presuppositions?
We can figure out three. All discover 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 actually been established by the mind of an affordable God, the specific same God who also made the sensible minds of humans.
Hence, these men presumed that if they used their minds to thoroughly study nature, they might comprehend the order and design that God had in fact put in the world.
Second, they assumed a hidden order in nature.
This was best revealed by thinker Alfred North Whitehead who argued, “There can be no living science unless there is a common instinctive conviction in the … Order of Nature”– a conviction he credited to belief in “the rationality of God.”.
This principle led to the amazing usage of mathematics to explain the arranged procedures at work worldwide, and inspired the development of better instruments, such as telescopes and microscopic lens, to see that order.
And 3rd, these developers of modern science presupposed the contingency of nature. This merely implies that God had many options about how to make an orderly world.
Just as there are lots of approaches to develop a clock, there were lots of way ins which God may have produced deep area. To find how He did, researchers may not merely deduce the order of nature by presuming what appeared most logical to them; that is, just making use of factor alone to reason, as the Greek thinkers had actually attempted to do.
For the overall script in addition to FACTS & & SOURCES, go to https://www.prageru.com/video/are-religion-and-science-in-conflict-science-and-god.
source
Does belief in God get in the approach of science? On the contrary: they thought that by doing science, they were finding God’s style and exposing it to humanity.
In their view, more science causes less God.
On the contrary: they believed that by doing science, they were discovering God’s style and exposing it to mankind.
Does belief in God get in the method of science? The idea that science and faith are unquestionably in disagreement is a popular method of believing today. On the contrary: they thought that by doing science, they were discovering God’s design and exposing it to mankind.
