Science VS Religion: Two discourses at war?

Science and Religion

When we talk about Philosophy a big question is the whole science against religion topic, it seems that this is one of the biggest and longest ongoing debates in the history of Philosophy. We have some of the biggest names of both discourses arguing their point of view in front of thousands of people that are eager to here the arguments put forward by said big names. We have come to a point in society where we seem to think that science and religion are interlocked at the core but are they? I have been studying the Philosophy of Science for a while now and cannot help but to think why do we tend to think that they are so connected?

For the likes of Richard Dawkins who think that they can use Science to disprove Religion we must question the sheer nature of Science. At its most basic form we understand Science to be a topic that can help us understand the world around, and whilst i find science a necessity and a fascinating topic I can't help but ask myself what has this got to do with religion?  One could define Science as a collection of facts obtained through observations and empirically tested theories. But what of Religion? Aside from the book of Genesis I see no attempt at explaining the world around us the same what that science, vice versa I see know attempt of Science to teach us about morality and ethical decision making. The point that I am trying to get across is there is no direct link between the two discourses when you look at them separately, they are merely two different ways of looking at life which has no direct conflict with each other.
So where does this conflict arise and why are there so many debates on the matter? Well that answer is simple, it is us. We are the reason for this and by that i mean certain individuals. We understand that different people believe in different things although we could agree that science would seem the more logical approach to life given the solid evidence it provides. However within  these two discourses we can find different types of believes. Of course by this I am talking of extremists in both topics, extremists are the reason for the conflict between the two topics as they believe that utilizing the knowledge of their discourse they can disprove the other. Richard Dawkins has a habit of trying to disprove Religion with the use of science which would seem to me to be a rather waste of time. However Religious extremists are also guilty of this and one could argue that there methods of displaying there belief are far more extreme and unnecessary but that is another topic for discussion.


The type of people that are worth mentioning regarding this topic are the scientists and religious people that are quiet in this topic, by this I mean the scientist that goes to work in a lab and is work on a cure for a common disease per sae and enjoys it because she has a passion for science. Now although this scientist has grown up around science and not religion she is not concerned with religion despite being a scientist. What she is concerned with is her work and evolving her knowledge with science. On the other end there is  a priest that is delivering a service four times a week to a parish and is enjoying doing so, furthermore in his spare time he is helping out at a homeless shelter because his faith has taught him to be kind to others. Now let us suggest that the scientist decides to help out at the same homeless shelter because she understands the dangers of being homeless and not eating enough. Strange now that two people from two 'opposing' discourses are now working together. One cannot help but wonder why extremists feel the need to inflict pain on others and why some scientists are so set out to destroy religion? I will conclude by saying that Science is fantastic and extremely fascinating in regards to what it has taught of the world even though it appears to be inductive. Religion has taught us how to love and be kind to one another and how to live in a community. The discourses seem fine alone there until we put individualism into the equation.



Jack Moran
18/10/2013