Science And Religion – Results Of An Absurd Debate

The conflict between science and religion is typical, classic and also wrong. People take the debate between science and religion to such an extreme that you have to choose one and hate the other. You see all sorts of absurd reasoning on social media. And if there are many injustices, there are even more attacks on people of different faiths.

In a misunderstanding, there is always a loser. The same goes for people involved in science – against the religion debate. Although the feeling of loss in a debate may be subjective. In the end, it does not matter how many losers there are. No one is convinced, and nothing is clarified. Nobody changes pages or questions about their original position.

The debate between science and religion

We would like to show you some of the arguments that people use most in this debate. We will talk about the two sides of the issue that you find in a forum or social media. Defenders of science claim that religious people are wrong because the information from holy books is not true. For example, those who want to argue against Christianity often point to the creation myth. This myth tells how the first man was created by God, and the first woman was created from the first rib of this man.

People who want to discredit those who believe in evolution point to the impossibility of humans descending from a monkey. This absurd debate, born of misinterpretations, is one of the most common. While it is true that some do not understand evolution, other people take the Bible literally and avoid metaphorical writing.

Another controversial topic is the religion of famous historical figures. Defenders of science, as well as defenders of religion, philosophers of names, chemists, physicists and endless famous people who believed or did not believe in God. Some believe that religious scholars are the best, others believe in atheists. But they only mention important people because they are important. They rarely talk about researchers who have made great strides in religion.

On the other hand, many consider science to be the religion of our day. And as if that were not enough, religious people use scientific arguments to demonstrate the existence of God. All arguments to prove or disprove the existence of God obviously collapse by themselves without resolving anything at all.

How to interpret these debates

These debates lack reflection and thought. They only seek to discredit the opponent. Debates that take place on the internet and not face to face give people more freedom to express themselves without filters. The supposed anonymity that the internet provides makes the subject of attacks more diffuse and impersonal. When someone criticizes a religious or scientific position, they are not attacking a particular person. They attack a general person or an idea. But these types of  debates can turn into situations that people take personally.

This process promotes an environment where the arguments become more and more ridiculous and far from the main point. Science and religion are compatible and there are different positions that bring them together. Those who do not seem compatible are from people who focus on the debate without listening to the other side. Or the only interpretation they consider is the one closest to the critique.

Modern positions regarding science and religion

It is important to remember that science is a method. You can think of it as a tool that helps us understand the world. But science is not perfect. The method is not perfect, nor are the people who practice it. Their conclusions can be biased or false. There are many aspects of life that escape the scope of science. However, this does not mean that we should accept some old theories and fall victim to absolute relativism.

On the other hand , religion fulfills certain functions that people with a simplified view of the world tend to overlook. Religion helps to unite people, relieve tension and fear around death, and encourages generosity and sharing. Sometimes religion is based on wrong or false ideas, but they are not bad in themselves. What makes them bad are usually those who interpret the religion in certain ways.

The scientist Carl Sagan gave a practical example of how science is not able to interpret everything. The saga said that we must think of the world in two dimensions, where all the inhabitants are flat squares. In this world, one day, a ball suddenly appears. The inhabitants of the square could not see it because the ball floated in the air. But then one day the ball bounced on the ground and left a round mark. The inhabitants of the world could not get over their surprise.

This story, as absurd as it may seem, helps us to reconsider the idea of ​​unknown dimensions. We do not know everything, nor will we be able to know everything. Therefore, it is important to think critically without disrespecting those who think differently. It will help us avoid ridiculous debate. Lack of respect only leads to conflict and pushes people apart. Dialogue and understanding promote reconciliation and coming together.