Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
essay about a section on science and religion
essay on religion and science
essay science and religion
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: essay about a section on science and religion
I believe we all got here someway. Everyone has formed their own opinions of how we got here too. Personally I think our planet was formed naturally, not by any gods, but was then shaped eventually by god. "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.” From www.deism.com, this quote by Albert Einstein sums up how I feel with religion and science being in the universe. In my perfect world, science and religion are compatible. I think science and religion is able to truly define what they call the meaning of life. We are here to learn and understand each other. God brought us here for a reason and has left us to force us to develop and survive in his world that he has created. Without god, we are nothing right now. God …show more content…
There are times where I think I am free, but in reality, I am never free. I will always be contained and could never be free. My destiny is controlled by my ethical conduct. Ethical conduct has always been very important to me as I feel this would determine people’s fate for many years, whether evil or juberent. I believe there is a utopia where people are able to exchange their ideas and thoughts freely with ethical conduct. It could lead all of us to a deeper understanding and I am trying to make sure that I leave behind a good legacy. “We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws” From www.Deism.com, this quote stated by Albert Einstein is very meaningful. I really don’t know all the laws in life, but I believe in following the basic commandments. In order for my future to be decided, I must make the right moves, from what the basic commandments humans have developed. However unlike Einstein, I believe that free will is relevent. I should be determining my fate until my very last breath and believe I should use free will as a guidance. I think it is very important that free will should be how we will be looking into generations to come. Generations are wanting to become their own identity. They feel they will be able to make the choices in which they believe in. Free will has evolved as generations are wishing to be more independent than ever before and losing their traditional ties they …show more content…
The point is to keep living life how I want to live. Nobody should have to live their life in a forceful way, but it happens. The freedom to choose how I want to live my life should always be the point of being here. It is why God placed us here. Being here and living your life is filling the holes of daily activities that God hoped we do. I find this theoretically to be the purpose of living. Humans will fill the holes of being kind to each other and being mean to each other. Humans will find ways to harm each other and they will find ways to love each other. Humans will be greedy and they will be giving. Humans are always fulfilling the daily duties of the laws of life. “Deism is the recognition of a universal creative force greater than that demonstrated by mankind, supported by personal observation of laws and designs in nature and the universe”. From www.deism.com, the source defines Deism as god is leaving us and telling me there is a purpose of why I am here, but I have to figure it out. I share the ideas of Deism because we are living here with a purpose. My system is like this because I was born and raised to realize this was my destiny. I realized over time, the lectures I heard, the various quotes and my surroundings have determined my personality and destiny. ”There is no abstract nature that one is destined to fill. Instead, each of us simply is in the world; what we will be is then entirely up to us”. From www.philosophypages.com, this
In the beginning, God created...the earth and the heavens, or an evolving mass of matter, later to become the heavens and the earth? The conflict between science and religion is a hot topic in many intellectual circles today. One of the more controversial topics is creation versus evolution. How did the world get to where it is right now? How was creation initiated? Is there a Creator or was life created spontaneously? These are some of the questions that boggle minds and set people searching for answers. There is even a conflict within the church: Did God create the heavens and the earth as they are, or did God allow the universe to develop according to natural laws? This conflict between science and religion continues to hold up in our supposed intellectual society. In order to tame this conflict and be true to their faith and science, Christian biologists have an obligation to reflect their Christianity in the realm of biology as well as their biological intellect in the realm of Christianity.
As said by Yale professor of psychology and cognitive science, "Religion and science will always clash." Science and religion are both avenues to explain how life came into existence. However, science uses evidence collected by people to explain the phenomenon while religion is usually based off a belief in a greater power which is responsible for the creation of life. The characters Arthur Dimmesdale and Roger Chillingworth in Nathaniel Hawthorne 's novel, The Scarlet Letter, represent religion and science, respectively, compared to the real world debate between science and religion. Roger Chillingworth is a physician who is associated with science. (ch. 9; page 107) "...made [Roger Chillingworth] extensively acquainted with the medical science of the day... Skillful men, of the medical and chirurgical profession, were of rare occurrence in the colony...They seldom... partook of the religious zeal that brought other emigrants across the Atlantic." The people of the Puritan community traveled across the Atlantic for religious reasons, and because men affiliated with medical science did not tend to practice religion, they rarely inhabited this community. Chillingworth, falling under the category of "skillful men of the medical and chirurgical profession," would not be expected to reside in this community. The narrator through emphasizes this with his rhetorical questioning, "Why, with such a rank in the learned world, had he come hither? What could he, whose sphere was in great cities, be seeking in the wilderness?" These questions demonstrate that it was so strange for Chillingworth to appear in this community because of his association with science. Perhaps, the phrase "with such rank in the learned world" could yield the narra...
Conflict between science and religion has been around way before Charles Darwin’s published book, Origin of the Species, came to be (“The Evolution, Creationism, and Intelligent Design Controversy”). Which is a book that is considered to be the foundation of evolutionary biology, featuring the idea of ‘natural selection.’ Some people believe that we as humans have evolved as the most intelligent and advanced species on the planet, while others think we have been placed here and designed for a reason. Many debates and court cases have come to be because of these two ideas of science versus religion. Although there are many debates between the two, the ideas overturn when the parties overlook the distinction between that which cannot be proven (faith), compared with that which has not been proven (theory) (Lipman, Robert M.). Theories, including evolution, can and should be investigated with appropriate scientific diligence (Lipman, Robert M.).
The relationship between science and religion is a difficult one and the two sides have tested each other and debated each other in many forums. Some believe there are major differences in science and religion and that the two can never coexist while others believe that science is in fact evidence that religious views are correct. To better understand and answer the question of whether the two sides really do conflict we will look at: my view on the subject, the definitions of both science and religion, basic arguments of both sides, scientific evolution, differing religions and religious views, the compatible versus incompatible argument, how religion has influenced science and views from the modern day scientist.
The intrinsic value that science adds to human’s lives can not be objectively measured but no one can doubt that science has made life as a human much easier over the course of our history as a species. What is science one might ask, and though science is basic and all humans practice it, the answer to that question is both simple and complex. Einstein defines science in his famous essay “Science and Religion” as “the century-old endeavor to bring together by means of systematic thought
5) in terms of science vs religion one of biggest most heated debates in the world. The argument goes that if you’re religious then you hate science and disagree with its findings and if you’re a scientist then you disagree with religious beliefs there are some people who believe in both. Religious people believe in faith and God which science sometimes disproves there God. The two groups have always been fighting since the medieval times. It usually consisted of scientist being burned by the stake for their findings. In my point of view of the topic I'm on the science side in the fact that they tend to be more correct than religions. That's my point of view I tend to believe in fact more than faith. One thing I would like to add is that
The conflicts between science and religion have been ending in stalemates for centuries since the presentation of Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution. After the 12th century the Church’s role in the teaching and preservation of the sciences would severely decline. Science grew so drastically that it became its own field of study. As the centuries advanced into the present time period it became more evident that there are still conflict between science and religion. Some of these conflicts are discussed in the March 22, 2013 journal issue of Congressional Quarterly Researcher (CQR) entitled: ‘Science and Religion: Can their conflicts be resolved?’ The article transverses the effects that the conflict between that of science and religion has
My belief in God was fading to nearly nothing by my junior and senior year. I was a jerk to most people around me, and I started to change that going into my junior year. I became a much kinder person. I was always cocky and began to be humbler and kinder to everyone around me. Upon realizing that I could do this without religion I believed that morality was all relative. I thought that everyone has a natural sense of what is right and wrong, and being a good person had nothing to do with religion. This new found belief brought me further from belief in God. I figured that I had become a much better person and that was all my own doing. I began digressing from the view that there was any need for a God at all.
At first glance, many facets of science and religion seem to be in direct conflict with each other. Because of this, I have generally kept them confined to separate spheres in my life. I have always thought that science is based on reason and cold, hard facts and is, therefore, objective. New ideas have to be proven many times by different people to be accepted by the wider scientific community, data and observations are taken with extreme precision, and through journal publications and papers, scientists are held accountable for the accuracy and integrity of their work. All of these factors contributed to my view of science as objective and completely truthful. Religion, on the other hand, always seems fairly subjective. Each person has their own personal relationship with God, and even though people often worship as a larger community with common core beliefs, it is fine for one person’s understanding of the Bible and God to be different from another’s. Another reason that Christianity seems so subjective is that it is centered around God, but we cannot rationally prove that He actually exists (nor is obtaining this proof of great interest to most Christians). There are also more concrete clashes, such as Genesis versus the big bang theory, evolution versus creationism, and the finality of death versus the Resurrection that led me to separate science and religion in my life. Upon closer examination, though, many of these apparent differences between science and Christianity disappeared or could at least be reconciled. After studying them more in depth, science and Christianity both seem less rigid and inflexible. It is now clear that intertwined with the data, logic, and laws of scien...
Understanding science and religion historically most individuals would assume that the two differ more than they relate. For decades, there has been the overwhelming debate about the differences between science and religion, and the issues that have set them apart from each other. However, personally, when it comes to the views, and goals of the two they share very similar ideologies and attributes.
INDTRODUCTION “Sex and Religion”? Those two don’t really go hand in hand,” commented a freshman student from UF. Like this student, numerous people around the world believe this misconception to be true. Whether people argue for or against the importance of gender in religion, more than just what goes on in the bedroom has been heating up lately. Many debates have sparked due to the negative connotation associated with sex when confronted about its position in religious cultures.
Religion plays an enormous role in the history of mankind. Wars have been fought over it, lives have been surrounded by it, and it has directly or indirectly shaped the lives of many individuals. Culture and religion play a large role in developing each other. People’s religion is decided by their culture. The prominence or the lack of religion will develop someone’s religious identity have play a core role in determining what that person believes.
The relationship between science and religion has been debated for many years. With strong personal opinions and beliefs, it is not surprising that no progress has been made in this argument. In my opinion, I feel as though religion and science have to be related in some way. There is no possible way people can separate two things that attempt to prove the same facts. My belief is that a metaphorical bridge has to be formed to connect the two. Personally, I feel as though science can be a compliment to religion, and that the scientific discoveries can and should be used to prove that God exists, not disprove it. If science did this, then the relationship between science and religion could be a friendly one. If that happened, people could stop debating and fighting over the two, allowing priests and scientists to talk and work together peacefully.
Up until the Enlightenment, mankind lived under the notion that religion, moreover intelligent design, was most likely the only explanation for the existence of life. However, people’s faith in the church’s ideals and teachings began to wither with the emergence of scientific ideas that were daringly presented to the world by great minds including Galileo and Darwin. The actuality that there was more to how and why we exist, besides just having an all-powerful creator, began to interest the curious minds in society. Thus, science began to emerge as an alternative and/or supplement to religion for some. Science provided a more analytical view of the world we see while religion was based more upon human tradition/faith and the more metaphysical world we don’t necessarily see. Today science may come across as having more solid evidence and grounding than religion because of scientific data that provides a seemingly more detailed overview of life’s complexity. “Einstein once said that the only incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible” (Polkinghorne, 62). Yet, we can still use theories and ideas from both, similar to Ian Barbour’s Dialouge and Integration models, to help us formulate an even more thorough concept of the universe using a human and religious perspective in addition to scientific data.
To addition, I believe the world was already made because of mother nature. My faith