Thread: God and science

Cant we all just get along?

What is it that prevents the truth seekers from coming together?
Science in its truest sense seeks the truth! religion also also seeks the truth! so what gives?
We all know that both science and religion have, in the past and present, seriously gone off course for political or monetary gain, or other reasons not as apparent, but at their heart they both seek the same thing...Truth!
I realize that the unthinking rigidity in both disciplines get in the way, but, if both are honestly seeking the truth, what should prevent them from walking hand in hand to the same goal? Is it ego, stubborn pride...what??
Am I the only one who thinks that these diciplines are compatible?

Lets here what you think!

Sweet, first on! I believe that they are compatiable, but sometimes the personalities get in the way.

I think that there are a couple of reasons for this.

Reason one; People don't know how to disagree. When I was younger, and someone said something wrong, I wanted to point it out to them. If they disagreed, I'd get mad and argue (I even came to blows once over something trivial). As I got older and more mature, I became more civil, but I still got angry inside when people disagreed. Then one day, I realized that people who don't believe the same as I have every right to be wrong. If someone thinks that the world is flat, it won't change the fact that it's round. It doesn't hurt me for someone else to believe something that is wrong. Then, I stopped getting upset when people claimed to know something that they didn't.

Reason two; People have their self image attached to being right. If they're wrong, then they have to think less of themselves. I don't think any less of my friends and family when they make a mistake. I've made some pretty stupid mistakes in my time, and my family still loves me. Don't be afraid of being wrong, it happens to everyone.

People have a hard time with the three simple words "I don't know". People have a hard time distinguishing between know and bleieve. I always try to keep in mind that I actually know very little. There are lots of things that I believe pretty strongly, but things may happen that might change my mind. In fact, whenever someone says something that I think is absolute BS, I stop and ask myself, "do I know that that's wrong, or do I believe it's wrong? Why do I believe it? What would it take to change my mind?" It makes for a calmer discussion that way.

Edit; After reading my post, I see that I've gone pretty far off the ole' "God/Science" topic. Sorry. I guess I'm just pontificating about internet arguments in general.

I think you hit the nail right on the head

Science is searching for truth but reject spiritualism as either truth or a means to find it.

Each religion claims to have the truth.

Kind of a basic difference of opinion there.

Interestingly most of the highest level physicists, those on the very frontier of the search for truth believe in God, or at least that there is an intelligent creator.

So they do get along in some sense.

I remember reading a story about a physicist who said that he was an atheist before he started studying sub-atomic particles, but now believes in God. The fact that sub-atomic particles don't adhere to the rules of nomal physics, or more accuratly the way they do act is what converted him. I don't know much about it other than that when you get below the atomic level the rules go out the window.

We think we are living in modern times and we are all very smart and so when something happens we can't explain we look for mystical or religious reasons to explain it. A long time ago people were burned at the stake for saying the Earth is not at the center of the cosmos or the Earth revolves around the Sun or the world was round for that matter. Maybe a couple hundred years from now people will look back and think how ignorant we were now. So what does this have to do with science and religion? its all a matter of perspective.

When faced with compexity religion has always opted for the simple approach that it had to have been created or made in such a fasion by God. Science is evidence based, theories are tested and re tested and dropped in the face of counter evidence. The two paths have little in common. I would rather have a solution based of a factual analysis than on mythology.

It is a matter of perspective. Not too long ago, I was reminded (I forget by what) of the doublethought wrought by my Christian culture away from school and my secular education, perhaps along with my love of nature shows on PBS as long as I can remember.

What I mean is the conflict of information between the two. Some examples (kept as brief as possible):

My parents biught a children's picture book of Bible stories, and on the page depicting the plague of frogs, there are a few frogs painted 'standing up' against the base of Pharo's throne. My sister and I immediately understood this to be a sign of evolution (we were children, but evolution was being thrown around a lot for kids our age) from frogs to people.

An example I do not remember specifically, something about ancient history, and also understanding that the Church taught the earth is only about six thousand years old. There were several statements of "Oh. So that was *before* God created the earth!" with such certaintly that it made perfect sense to our young minds.

More on topic, I have no idea how consistent this is. But considering some attempts a few have made to explain how both (the Christian) religion and science can both be right, have all ended with even more feverish dispute.

Science and Religion...both seek the truth...why can't we all just get along...

Interesting question(s)...some interesting opinions thus far.

My take on the subject, but first let me lay out some personal biases (something that I believe is too rarely done--both in the name of science and religion):
1) I am a scientist...have a BS, MS, and PhD in various aspects of forestry; I work as a teaching faculty member and as a researcher.
2) I am religious. Many years ago, I spent 4 years studying to be a Roman Catholic Priest. Left not because I didn't believe, but my desire to become a priest conflicted with my desire to be a husband and father.
3) Currently regularly attend a Lutheran Church with my wife and daughter.
4) I see absolutely no incompatibality between science and religion.

That said, where I find that we get into difficulties is when we try to mix the two. At its most basic, science seeks to explain our world around us based on repeatable, verifyable observation. Logic, reasoning, and analysis are integral in the process.

Religion on the other hand, if you strip everything else away, has at its core...faith. A belief in something that cannot by its very nature be proven. Thus, religion is outside the realm of proof...outside the realm of science.

Where we get into trouble (historically and currently) is when we try to mix the two. For instance, when the church persecuted scientists because their inquiries into the nature of the world and the cosmos was at odds with the accepted dogma. Likewise the current insistance that 'creationism' be taught as science in school...

It is not possible to argue against religion (anything that is known to be true based on faith rather than tangible evidence), using science, logic, or reasoning. Because the belief is not based on evidence, but on faith, than evidence will do little to change the individual's position.

Just another data point,
Ed