Human 3991 Discussion Unit 3

Posted: March 27th, 2020

Human 3991 Discussion Unit 3

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliation

Human 3991 Discussion Unit 3

Discussion #1

            Religion is a term that is used to describe an individual’s set of beliefs, emotions, practices, behaviors, and dogmas that are used to express their understanding and relationship with a deity, divine, God(s), or Supreme Being. Religion is affirmed to satisfy a human being’s spiritual needs in addition to helping them cope with questions, experiences, or phenomena such as life and death, and other unexplained or incomprehensible spectacles. People attribute events or phenomena they do not understand to a higher being or entity, which is an inherent psychological need for the maintenance of balance and control. Religious beliefs and superstitions influence people’s perception of the world and their reaction to various events. Religion has for a long time been the only expected, logical, and accepted answer to all phenomena encountered by humans (Brooke, 1991). The advancement of civilizations through time resulted in more awareness and enlightenment using tools and technology, which heralded in the era of science based on the use of facts and evidence to explain phenomena in life.

According to Alister McGrath in his lecture titled “Faith, Proof, and Evidence: What’s Right to Think?,” the conflict between science and religion can be insulated against if the two schools of thought can be perceived as tools that serve different purposes in an individual’s life and existence. Hedley Brooke argues in Chapter 1: Interaction between Science and Religion that perceptions or attitudes applied towards the relationship between science and religion determines the prevailing association (Brooke, 1991). Brooke states that the conflict model discounts logic and evidence to base everything on faith. The separationist approach supports McGrath’s position that science and religion should be distinguished as distinct entities that serve unique and respective needs in people’s existence (McGrath, 2010). Brooke observes that a third model exists that recommends science and religion be perceived as alternative approaches or methodologies used to explain and confer understanding about various phenomena. It can be construed that religion and science are schools of thought used by different people to explain and garner further insights into the apparent conscious order imposed on nature by reaffirming each other where connections manifest (Brooke, 1991).  

Reference

Brooke, J. H. (1991). Science and religion: Some historical perspectives. Cambridge University Press.

Discussion #2

            Ian Barbour observes in “When Science Meets Religion” that modern-day institutions and culture are making significant contributions towards acerbating the reemergence of conflict between science and religion. Barbour cites the media as an example of a popular social institution that propagates and incites conflict between science and religion for its dramatic effect favorable for attracting viewers, readers, and/or listeners. Barbour proposes a confluence of religion and science as schools of thought that complement and reinforce each other instead of the separatist or conflict models of interaction. Alister McGrath in his lecture titled “Cosmology and Creation: How do they Relate to One Another?” considers the religious theory of creation and the scientific postulate of cosmology. McGrath provides these two positions as examples of how science and religion can complement and reinforce each other. McGrath posits that religion is used by people to cultivate a sense of identity (McGrath, 2010).

People use religion and their spirituality to create a purpose and meaning for their lives at a level they can relate to individually. Science represents an alternative approach that caters to people’s inherent curiosity and their need to understand their surroundings and self in a logical and systematic sequence that allows them to manipulate and exploit various entities and phenomena (Barbour, 2000). These observations corroborate Barbour’s postulate that religion and science are based on top-down causality and vice versa from the most basic elements to a higher constituent being. The existence of a lower state of existence to a higher level results in a dualism that can be explained from a religious or scientific perspective. Doctrines defining divinity and guiding principles towards the attainment of righteous spirituality can be correlated to laws of physics, chemistry, biology, and psychology that provide logical insights into the nature of life and existence.

Reference

Barbour, I. G. (2000). When science meets religion. San Francisco: Harper San Francisco.

Discussion #3

Alister McGrath in Chapters 7, 8, & 9 of his lecture series titled “Science and Religion” attributes the development of science and religion to the human being’s incessant quest to make sense of phenomena they interact with and observe. McGrath portends that both science and religion are alternative approaches used by people to develop insights into and understand the different experiences they encounter in life. He further emphasizes that the core feature of the relationship between religion and science is that they are both explanatory in their various exploits to establish a meaningful and an acceptable justification of ambiguities they encounter (McGrath, 2010). McGrath’s perspectives on science and religion can be correlated to Ian Barbour’s dialogue and integration theses that describe relationships between the two. The dialogue between science and religion is mooted to encourage cooperation and collaboration in demystifying various ambiguities while respecting the boundaries and integrity of each discipline. The integration of science and religion creates a dual causality, whereby they reinforce and complement each other in the formulation of explanations for various ambiguities encountered in life. Alister McGrath portends that attitudes and philosophies embraced regarding the relationship between science and religion determine the nature of progress made to improve the human situation. Approaches that seek to promote dialogue and the integrationist models of interaction between religion and science have a higher probability of improving the wellbeing and situation of human existence.

References

McGrath, A. E. (2010). Science and religion: A new introduction. John Wiley & Sons.