Science is no religion and religion is no science

RH Bennett PhD


It has always frustrated me no end when religionists try to use science to "prove" a religion or set of beliefs.  Letʻs be clear science is a set of methods that are very useful to systematically reveal the workings of the universe.  It is NOT a set of beliefs.  The laws of nature exist independent of anyone's beliefs.  Try not respecting the Law of Gravity for a belief we can walk on air or water for that matter.

Having a set of beliefs and then use what we know of science and twist it to fit those preformed beliefs is not science, it is fraud.

Many Churches today invoke celestial beings from far away heavens or galaxies to explain beliefs in a way that sounds like science when in reality it is science fiction.

There is no conflict intrinsic to science and religion.  Just as there is no conflict between an apple or an orange.  The apple called religion is a set of beliefs predicated on faith.  Faith is not and cannot be based on science, because faith is NOT scientifically testable.    Belief based on Faith is an internal and personal decision.  To be scientific is to embrace the unknown, especially the unknown, unknown and try via controlled experiments to make something known.

Make no mistake we must and should respect the faith of a person, but just as soon as the faithful decided that reality is about secret planets, evil deities or guardian angles and attempt to make their reality, the reality, faith displaces science.  More dangerous is when faith becomes a public edict and attempts to subvert others freedom of belief and become gods law. It shows up all the time when some says,  It is a Godʻs will or God acts in mysterious ways to explain the unexplainable when logic cannot.

So lets us agree there are two ways to view reality.  The view of faith is a personal belief and identity to which anyone is free to ascribe.   The view that universe has a common set of characteristics that are discoverable using the systematic rules of the scientific method as another way of being.

The frightening aspect of faith is that it is very malleable. Witness the thousands of faith-based beliefs that exist on the planet today.   It is this malleability that allowed humans to wage mass murder in the name of god. Witness how a man who defiles "faith-based family values" is a cult-like saint among evangelicals.

In contrast, scientific principals resist malleability,  save the monied interests that use less than ethical scientists like paid escorts to service their agenda.  The scientific method is not immune to actions of unscrupulous persons and corporations acting on their beliefs.    This abuse has become so great that trust in science as a method declines nowadays and mythical beliefs rise among the science illiterate.

To get back into balance and create a livable world for all we must learn how to honor the process called science conducted by ethical scientists.  At the same time, we must respect a personʻs faith, as long as the faith remain personal.  When the tenants of faith become social edicts or worse yet public policy, the push back must remain a question of ethics and morals and not arguments from scientific data. Such a conflict is not reconcilable and we should tread not on the false dichotomy of religion versus science.