Science and religion: examining the relationship between faith and empirical inquiry

Science and Religion

How exactly is the movement known as "Deism" motivated by the scientific discoveries of Isaac Newton? That is, precisely what aspects of Newton's mechanistic worldview offer support to advocates of Deism?

Both science and religion have attempted different quests and inquiries into the nature of our universe and especially into its origins. Modern science however, beginning with the positivist science of Newton and Darwin, postulates that the laws of nature can be all self- explained on the basis of rational thought and, consequently, as the famous statement of the French nineteenth century physicist Laplace informs us, there is no need for the God-hypothesis to interpret the universe. It has been stated many times that that Isaac Newton has revolutionized the world of physics completely, laying the strong foundations of classical science. The name of the age which harbored these incredible scientific advancements was also very suggestive: the 'Enlightenment' was a period of illumination and scientific revolution. Newton's mechanist theories advocated the absolute order, limitation and perfection of the universe, which virtually functioned like a perfect clockwork. At the same time, religion and myth were banished from the reality, as offering only artificial and unreliable interpretations of the world. The belief in a divinity was not altogether discarded however, and thus a new religion was born: 'deism'. Deism or 'natural religion' was a means mitigating the deeply rooted conflict between science and religion. This new doctrine promulgated the idea that God was the perfect creator of this perfect, clockwork and automated world. For the deists, the divinity was not so much a spiritual force, but a great natural and ethical power. There are no more myths and miracles, everything being explainable through the natural laws. Thus the divinity was just the force behind the clockwork, ensuring its proper functioning, without ever violating natural law. Thus, whereas religion is usually in conflict with the scientific approach to reality precisely because it relies on the manifestation of divinity as a miracle, a break of the supernatural through the skin of reality, deism believed in the supremacy of the natural law over everything else.

2. What exactly are the three general categories of arguments for God's existence that are important for the science/religion debates?

There are three main categories of arguments for God's existence, such as they have been theorized by theology and philosophy: the cosmological arguments, the ontological arguments and the theological arguments. The cosmological arguments thus refer to the mystery which yet surrounds the origins of the universe. These arguments postulate that the existence of God is a necessary condition for explaining the origins of the world. The ontological arguments refer to the analysis of the concept of God itself and to the idea that, if God can be conceived in the mind, then his existence is already proved. The theological arguments take into consideration the design of the universe and the apparent interconnectivity of things, which generally leads people to believe that such coincidences would be impossible without the existence of a divine architect. Another theological argument that is most often brought in favor of the existence of the sacred is perhaps the actual need of man to look for symbols of the spiritual or of the supernatural. It becomes obvious that man cannot live in a totally demythologized world, although modern scientific research tends to increase the gap between the world of the ancient myths and the natural world. However, there remains a fact that is still unexplained by science, and that of late, has become the concern of many modern scientific hypothesis: the fact that the mind and the spiritual side of man still have an unknown origin, that is hard to be deducted as having its source in the world of matter.

3. What were the three broad types of responses (approaches) within the Christian tradition of biblical interpretation to the Copernican models of the universe?

The medieval world posited the place of the Earth at the center of the universe. The Copernican revolution which revealed the actual truth about the place of Earth in the solar system was the first step towards modern science but also one of the first terrible grudges between religion and science. The first responses to the Copernican revolution were obviously violent, as the new theory seemed to challenge the religious views held as true so far. Initially, the men of science that tried to share their revolutionary observations of the heavens were completely banned by the influential church at that time. Later however, the church attempted to reconcile its scriptural views with those exemplified by science. Thus, the religious theories grew to acknowledge the heliocentric theory, despite the fact that its shattered the anthropocentric view. The first response thus was one of definite rejection. With Copernicus, the generally accepted paradigm changed considerably. Later however, as the science developed more and more incorporating new information into its core, the church started to adapt to the changes fast. Thus, in response, the Christian tradition adjusted its views so as to include the new scientific discoveries. The deists for instance, felt compelled to advocate the existence of a God that would be so impassive as to completely obey the natural law. Gradually thus, religion grew from rejection to acceptance and later on incorporation of the new scientific discoveries into its core substance.

4. What exactly are the three major approaches to the question of God's action on earth? Be specific and make sure that you identify the similarities and differences among these three approaches.

The modes of God's action in the world changed together with the shift of religious doctrines and beliefs. Thus, the Deists believed that God acts in the world through the natural laws. In this view, no actual action of God was required, as the universe had been created to perfection from the beginning and it now functioned as an autonomous system: "It is this point which is encapsulated in Laplace' famous comment made in relation to the role of God as the sustainer of planetary motion: 'I have no need of this hypothesis.'"(McGrath, 104) the second mode of action is that promoted by Thomas de Acquinas: 'God acts through secondary causes.' There is thus a great chain of causality, which goes back to God as the prime mover of the world: "According to Acquinas, God does not work directly in the world, but through secondary causes."(McGrath, 105) Thus, in this view, God does not act directly in the world but only through secondary causes, by determining certain things. Still, God is the originator of everything even if indirectly so. Another mode of God's acting in the world is the one formulated by 'process theology': 'God acts through persuasion.' Thus, the creation in general develops or changes through God's careful persuasion or discrete ordering of things.

5. Write an essay that answers the following question: what are the important differences between confrontational models of the relationship between science and religion and non-confrontational models of this relationship?

Alister McGrath pointed out to the difference between the confrontational models for the relationship between science and religion and the non-confrontational modes of the same relation. Basically, while science was not yet very developed its inquiries were under the influence of religious beliefs. Later on, when crucial advancement had been made, such as the Copernican revolution, the Newtonian one or the Darwinian one brought potent challenges against a religious interpretation of the world: "Historically, the most significant understanding of the relation between science and religion is that of conflict or perhaps even warfare."(McGrath, 42) According to McGrath, the confrontation resulted into the belief that religion offered but a superstitious interpretation of reality, which was hardly connected with the actual, objective truth. Among the scientific revolutions which most challenged religion was certainly Darwin's evolutionist theory that attacked the Genesis myth in the Bible and showed that natural evolution might be possible without God's intervention: "Although there is a danger of overstatement, the rise of the scientific view called into question many traditional religious views [...] it is the Darwinian controversy which posed the most radical threat to traditional religious beliefs in that it posed a direct threat to the belief that God created each species directly and particularly the idea that man was the apex of God's creation..."(McGrath, 51) the non-confrontational models of the relationship between science and religion are given by the such doctrines as that of deism or natural theology, which propose the idea that God acts in the world only through the establishment of general order and natural laws.

6. Is the story of the Creation as presented in the Book of Genesis from the Old Testament (the Hebrew Bible) a cosmogonic myth as understood by Eliade? Include an account of Eliade's notion of cosmogonic myth.

The myth relates a real history in so far as it is speaking about the real facts and aspects of life, such as the creation of the world, death, or the creation of a certain fragment of life, like an animal or a plant or even a human habit or activity. Perhaps the essential myth of all those that exist is that of the cosmogony, or the birth of the universe. This myth has taken incredibly many forms in the course of history, but it should be noticed that all of these forms postulate the existence of a divine will behind the creation of the world, be it a single God as in Christian doctrine or many divinities as in the ancient eastern or western mythologies: "Always related to a "creation," it tells how something came into existence, or how a pattern of behavior, an institution, a manner of working were established; this is why myths constitute the paradigms for all significant human acts. (Eliade, 18) the essence of the cosmogonic myth is the fact that it recreates the origins of the universe, explaining its roots: "Myth narrates a sacred history; it relates an event that took place in primordial Time, the fabled time of the "beginnings." In other words, myth tells how, through the deeds of Supernatural Beings, a reality came into existence, be it the whole of reality, the Cosmos, or only a fragment of reality -- an island, a species of plant, a particular kind of human behavior, an institution. Myth, then, is always an account of a "creation;" it relates how something was produced, began to be. Myth tells only of that which really happened, which manifested itself completely."(Eliade, 5-6) the Biblical myth of creation is obviously an instance of the cosmogonic myth, since it attempts to explain the origins of the universe, referring at the same time to the creation of the different categories of things. The Biblical creation of the world is thus a typical cosmogonic story which explains how everything appeared on earth, insisting on the basic roles established for each thing in the beginning.

7. What exactly are the three approaches to natural theology? Be specific.

Natural theology emphasizes a different approach to reality, which attempts to bridge the gap between religious and scientific knowledge. According to the natural theology, God has natural attributes and his manifestation is also available through the natural world. Not looking for means to transcend the real world, natural theology posits the existence of God as part of the natural world. Thus, the deists believed that God needs to be found in nature and revealed through its perfection. Next, natural theology was centered around the belief that everything in nature was marvelous and therefore everything was a token of God's existence. This second approach was proper of the Cambridge Platonists. The third approach is that of Acquinas, who revealed God to be the prime mover of all things in the universe, without however acting directly in nature.

8. What exactly is the essential ethical theme that emerges from myths of cosmic cataclysms, with respect to the judgment of humankind before and after the cataclysm?

The myths of cosmic cataclysm seem to be curiously recurrent in many religions and cultures. The myth of the flood is probably one of the most famous instances of this type of sacred story. Its ethical purpose is clear: it emphasizes the need for purification and a return to the original innocence, away from sin and perversion. Thus, this intervention of the sacred into the profane brings the world to its beginnings again: "Hence myths disclose their creative activity and reveal the sacredness (or simply the "supernaturalness") of their works. In short, myths describe the various and sometimes dramatic breakthroughs of the sacred (or the "supernatural") into the World. It is this sudden breakthrough of the sacred that really establishes the World and makes it what it is today. Furthermore, it is as a result of the intervention of Supernatural Beings that man himself is what he is today, a mortal, sexed, and cultural being."(Eliade, 5) Thus, the essential ethical idea behind this myth is the fact that the human world requires purification and purging from time to time. The story of a natural cataclysm is probably given a sacred connotation in order to ease the acceptance of such natural disasters, as part of God's will on earth.

9. Does Barbour's notion of religious story as a model support Eliade's notion of religious story as a cosmogonic myth? That is, are the two notions compatible with each other? Include clear accounts of both Barbour's notion (and understanding) of a religious story and Eliade's notion (and understanding) of a religious story.

Eliade understood the myths as the stories that attempt to explain the origins of the universe and of most of the things the universe is made of. According to Eliade, myth was at first the only valid form of explanation for the origin of the different natural phenomena. Later however, the discovery of history led to the partial denigration of myth as fable or a fantasy: "It is only through the discovery of History -- more precisely by the awakening of the historical consciousness in Judaeo-Christianity and its propagation by Hegel and his successors -- it is only through the radical assimilation of the new mode of being represented by human existence in the world that myth could be left behind. But we hesitate to say that mythical thought has been abolished. As we shall soon see, it managed to survive, though radically changed (if not perfectly camouflaged). And the astonishing fact is that, more than anywhere else it survives in historiography! (Eliade, 113) One of the first things that the scientific modes of thinking have in common with the mythical or religious modes, is their main purpose- to interpret or explain the universe and our own existence in it, or to give meaning to the world in order to escape chaos, as Mircea Eliade observed. Mythical structures and symbols could be an indicative of the human fear of chaos. Also, the existence of the sacred in the world has the same function- the world is seen by the religious man as a divine creation, therefore as something ordered, harmonious and meaningful. Ian Barbour's notion of a religious story is very similar to that of Eliade's cosmogonic myth. Thus, like Eliade, Barbour emphasizes the basic structure of the religious story as one that is meant to reveal the origin of a certain thing or of the whole itself, emphasizing the concern with the interpretation of origins.