"Religion and Science" discusses a controversy that was particularly apparent in society since the publication of Charles Darwin's Origin of Species in 1859. The issue was relevant in the 1920s because of the "Monkey Trial in Tennessee in 1925 testing whether or not a science teacher could teach the theory of evolution in a public school in the state.
About the writer Alfred North Whitehead
Alfred North
Whitehead was one of the most important mathematicians of the twentieth
century. He and his student, Bertrand Russell, collaborated on the celebrated
three-volume Principia Mathematica
(1910-1913), which showed the connection between mathematics and formal logic.
The Lowell Lectures which he delivered at Harvard University in 1925 were
published as Science and the Modern World, and this essay is
excerpted from that book.
About the text Religion and Science
The conflict
between religion and science has a way of erupting age after age. In this essay
Religion and Science, Whitehead makes a genuine effort to find a means of
putting the conflict into perspective and softening the disagreements.
Whitehead argues that the respective truths of science and religion are
actually quite separate, and this essay is probably the most appreciative
evaluation of religion that has been written from a non-theistic perspective.
He maintains that "Religion will not regain its old power until it can
face change in the same spirit as does science."
Whitehead's
ultimate view is that much work must be done by our society to avoid harsh
clashes between the forces of science and religion. And both forces must learn
to recognize that a "clash of doctrines is no disaster," but that
valuable change can emerge from them. Whitehead finally asserts that progress
for science implies progress for religion, and that religion can and must
evolve.
Summary of the essay Religion and Science
Charles
Darwin, a groundbreaking book, advocates that human beings evolved from
animals. In this book, science and religion got conflict. Religious people
thought that God had made human beings.
According to
Whitehead, there are similarities and differences between science and religion.
Over time, both of them change. For example, in the time of Galileo, the pope
and religious guru believed in the Geocentric concept (earth is centered and
the sun revolves around it).
Later,
Galileo making a powerful telescope proved that the sun is centered and Earth
moves around it (helio-centric). His ideas became controversial and he was
sentenced to jail by religious people. Now, religious people also believed in
the heliocentric concept. Science also believes in changes if the previous
claim and truth become false by doing experiments and research.
In
comparison with religion, science changes fast. For example, initially,
scientists believed that the earth was in rectangle shape, now they believe in
the oval shape of the earth. Ideas or theories upon the same thing can be true
at different times. Newton's concept of the physical nature of light was
believed in the 18th century while Huygens's ideas of the nature of light were
believed in the 17th century. The writer also finds differences between them.
Science believes in fact, and objective truth while religion believes in the
outer world.
He thinks
that science and religion should believe in changes, if not, their existence
can be collapsed. He says that a clash of doctrines is not a disaster- it is an
opportunity. Due to conflict between science and religion, real ideas of
helio-centric emerged.
Frequently asked questions from the essay Religion and Science
1. What are Whitehead's definitions
of religion and science?
Ans: According to Whitehead, science is related to
physical phenomena while religion deals with the world beyond.
2. How are religion and
science-related?
Ans: Religion and science are related because, in both
fields, different concepts are changed and added. Their studying field is
different but the essence of the study is inter-related.
3. What are the similarities between
religion and science?
Ans:
Science beliefs are not constant. They go on changing. In the past, there was a
geocentric concept (earth is the center) but later changed to helio-centric
(the sun is in the center). Now, religious people also believe in the
heliocentric concept. Such addition and modification also happen in the field
of religion. That's why these two fields do have similarities
4. What is the most scientific
religion?
Ans: The most scientific religion is based on fact and
objective truth. It establishes truth which is proved by observation and
experimentation. If it is proved the previous fact is false, it can change easily.
5. When did science and religion
separate?
Ans: In the late 19th and the early 20th century, science
and religion separated.
6. Is Whitehead clearer regarding
religion or regarding science? When is he least clear?
Ans: He seems to be clearer with science but he is least
clear with religion because he says that worship is a surrender to the claim
for assimilation. He is confused with the value of worship or the real
existence of religion though he says that conflict between religion is science
is constructive.
7. Do you think Whitehead treats
religion fairly in this piece?
Ans: I do not think Whitehead treats religion fairly in
this piece but he seems to challenge the established religion.
8. One problem religion has,
according to Whitehead, lies in the imagery it uses to express its truths.
Define his concept regarding that imagery. What is he referring to? Would a
change in imagery entail a change in the conflict between religion and science?
Ans: According to Whitehead, religion believes in subjective
truth. So, it finds the existence of god's stone, church, temple, and
monastery. They are images to represent the gód. For him, such images are a
problem for science. If such factors are not considered God's images, there
will be lessened somehow conflict between God & religion.
9. In the essay, Whitehead speaks of
the fading of religion in modern life. Does his view of the fading of religion
from modern life square with your observation of religion's role in life?
Ans: White advocates that religion is fading away in
modern life. I also believe that religious people do not have similar faith in
the gods. We have different Gods in different geographies & places. As
Hindus, we hope to find God in stone and temples. Today, a religious man is a
hypocrite, and self- centered. They do not possess the code of religious faith.
They are money seekers in the name of God.
10. Religion is or is not
antagonistic to science. Argue.
Ans: Religion is not antagonistic to science because a
struggle between religion and science is fruitful to evolve new and factual
ideas. Church, in ancient, had the faith of earth is the center and the sun
revolves around it. Copernicus did not believe it and said the sun is centered
and the earth moves around it. This concept is helio-centric. Later Galileo
made a powerful telescope and proved heliocentric ideas. This new idea was not
easily accepted by religious men but it was the fact. Due to the clash between
religion and science, people of the entire world get the fact of earth &
sun.
11. In what ways are the methods of
science different from the methods of religion?
Ans: Science is based on truth, and rationality and is
worthy of being accepted. Religion is based on emotions, myths, and unreliable
methods of truth determination. Since the dawn of man, humans have striven to
explain the many mysteries of the universe and to justify our existence in it.
Throughout
this journey of self-understanding, numerous standpoints on human existence
have evolved and merged into a complex, abstract manifestation called religion.
However, as the human race has grown and advanced itself, many ideas expressed
by religion seem less and less plausible. Advances in science and technology
have yielded a new breed of human thought that has disturbed and shaken the
foundations of religious ideology.
Our new,
scientifically grounded understanding of the universe has unfolded a plethora
of answers to age-old questions, which are antithetical to the explanations
offered by religion.
12. Using the material provided in
the essay, establish exactly what the conflict has been between religion and
science. Do you think that there have been adequate grounds for the conflict,
or has it simply been a product of misunderstanding? Is the conflict
inevitable? Do you believe it will continue in your lifetime?
Ans:
Religion and science study the different fields, aspects, and field of study
and context are opposite. Due to different concerns of study, the conflict is
essential and this conflict, I think will continue in our lifetime. In fact,
two things of two poles never meet. In the same way, they do not have full
reconciliation and remain in conflict between them till human minds are on the
earth.
13. Is the process of acquiring
religious and scientific explanations similar?
Ans: I think
that the process of acquiring religion & scientific explanation is not
similar. Religion attempts to acquire knowledge from the invisible source while
science believes in objective truth. Those things which cannot be touched,
seen, experimented with, science does not accept its entity on the earth.
Religion believes in ghosts, supernatural elements, and vampires while science
takes them as an airy fact. In conclusion, they have different fields of study
but both are similar because they believe in modification and change in old
concepts.