Both religion and science are methods for explaining natural phenomenon, as well as a means of answering life’s questions or guiding decision-making processes. Unfortunately, religion and science have a tendency to butt heads, so to speak.

Some examples of disagreement between religion and science include evolution vs. intelligent design, divine creation of the universe vs. the “Big Bang,” etc.

It is not my intention to sway anyone towards one side or the other, but rather to at least consider the other side, whatever your position may be, and to convince everyone that science and religion should not be considered enemies.

One common misconception which needs to be addressed is that “science proves religion wrong.”

“I want to believe in Catholicism, but it is very hard nowadays with everyone saying that science can retort many religious claims,” senior geography major Katie McAllister said.

In my four years spent at NIU studying the natural sciences, I have not yet come across definitive proof that life was not created by an intelligent being, and the argument over the Big
Bang has raged on for decades.

Who can truly answer all of life’s questions through science? Each new discovery gives rise to a thousand more questions to be answered.

Religion, however, fills the void for many people who cannot put all of their faith into science.

Religion can give answers to the questions that science will never be able to answer. While a scientific theory is based on facts, a theory is not a fact itself, but rather a conclusion based on certain observations. That being said, a theory is truly no more correct than any conclusion derived from religious texts.

One theory can disprove another and old theories are improved upon to form new ones.
Science is ever-changing and the common view that science is ‘the truth’ only extends as far as collecting laboratory data. Measurements may be correct, but the reason behind the numbers is for the scientist to deduce.

Any implications from laboratory data are developed just the same as implications based on religious texts. First, an observation is made, then a theory is produced to explain the observation based on postulates which already exist. The main difference between science and religion is that scientific data is gathered through experiments in the scientific world, while data is collected through ancient texts in the religious world.

Other areas where science and religion disagree surround moral issues such as stem cell research, genetic engineering and cloning. Often, religious dogma forbids modern stem cell research since stem cells must be harvested from human embryos.

Recent discoveries, however, indicate that there may be ways around these moral dilemmas so that stem cells can be grown without the use of embryos.

A recent BBC News article, “Ethical Stem Cell Crop Boosted,” says that a new procedure has been developed for harvesting stem cells from adult tissue which yields 200 times more stem cells and takes half the time as previous methods.

This goes to show that while some scientific methods may oppose religious ideals, with time and effort new methods can be discovered in order to stay clear of these moral dilemmas.

Just as scientists should be more open to cultural views, religious practitioners should similarly be open to scientific evidence.

“I’ve been raised Catholic, but I disagree with how the Church deals with science,” senior theater major Elek Hutchinson said. “They need to keep in touch with modern ways of thinking
if they want to retain their followers.”

While it may be reasonable to believe that one’s religion holds the right answers, to dismiss scientific data solely because it conflicts with one’s spiritual views is a mistake.

People should be open to all viewpoints outside of their own because more often than not, the correct answer will lie somewhere down the middle of both paths. If evolution is real, perhaps it is directed by a supreme being rather than the result of natural selection alone.

There is simply no concrete way to debunk religious beliefs through science since most religion is based on interpretation of religious texts rather than measurements; and religion cannot disprove science since scientific theories are structured around measurements and have no
factors for divine intervention in the corresponding equations.

Remember that there is no “right” or “correct” answer for the cause of natural phenomena, only the best guess. Do not dismiss the other viewpoint because it conflicts with your own. If you do not take all possibilities into account, you may miss out on finding the answer which suits you most.

All comments are moderated before being published. We will not edit your comments, but we also will not approve those that are abusive, off-topic, attack another poster or contain information we know to be libelous or false.

During peak weekday viewing times, most comments will be reviewed within six hours. For more detailed information, click here.

After submitting your comment, check below for a confirmation message.

• Your name:
• Enter text from image:
  

• Your comment:

* 300-character count. HTML formatting will not display.