Science vs Religion

One aspect of the science and religion debate that seems to be raging these days that seems to get overlooked is the actual balances involved in the argument. Science is a study of the processes that make up everything around us, its causes, effects, creation, destruction, every aspect of an item can be discussed in scientific terms. There has long been a move, especially driven by physics to find a Grand Unified Theory, that is a set of explanations and fixed rules that the universe works to. Whilst this is an admirable, if yet unresolved, task it is obvious that any set of laws that cover such a massive, possibly infinite set of actions, if achieved would have to be so vague in a day to day sense that they would be of little use. To look at the realities of everyday science the more detailed and specific rules would still be needed. It is therefore inevitable that science is always going to be an immense and fairly disjointed set of disciplines. That is not to in anyway trying to undermine its relevance, but I am just pointing out that it is a such a wide-ranging and diverse field that calling it all by one name "science" is akin to saying that your house is full of "stuff" or the world is populated by "beings", true but hardly insightful.

Religion on the other hand has an easy task. With its reliance on creationism and intelligent design it can really be summed up in one line. "God willed it, and so it is" anything that doesn't fit our understanding is down to "gods mysterious ways", anything too complex to explain is "the wonder of god."

This imbalance makes the debate between the two camps very one sided. Religion really only has to prove science wrong once. If there is one thing it can't explain then the fall back argument of "well that proves the existence of god" is thrown across the table. Science has the unenviable task of having to justify itself in every area, in biology, astro-physics, chemistry etc but religion has one catch all response to any gaps in the database of scientific knowledge. Science is an ever evolving discipline, new boundaries are constantly being breached and new discoveries negate old theories, science argues with itself to better its own understanding. Religion needs to look for no new answers, at the time of the creation of a faith, its answers are already written and there is nothing to be added, even though this immutable information is often laid down in books thousands of years ago.

There is a middle ground between the two but it lies more in our understanding of god as a process than as a personification but neither side seems ready to step into the middle ground. There have been notable exceptions. Thomas Aquinas was alluding to the dangers of blind faith when he said "beware of a man with only one book" and Einstein believed in god saying ""I want to know God's thoughts; the rest are details." The late Pope John Paul II had it right when he said "Science can purify religion from error and superstition. Religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes." Maybe we should try to leave our vanities and career minded paths and take on board what people like the three I have mentioned have been brave enough to utter. Maybe then there is some hope of understanding and integration.