Lesson 1 - Science And Religion

-discovery that there must be subatomic particles which behave in highly counterintuitive ways -Germany, Switzerland and elsewhere, the first half of the twentieth century

Discovery that if certain parts of brain are stimulated they can induce religious feelings in about 8 out of 10 subjects Ontario Canada the 1980

The discovery that the earth orbits the sun Padua Italy 1610

-galileo a famous scientist faced trouble with the Catholic Church because he said earth and planets orbit the sun -this incident is often cited as an example of conflict between Christianity and science; even though ,ostensibly western Christian’s now believe in heliocentrism

God hel,et Interesting case to explore relationship between science and religion

-science comes from, Latin word for knowledge -science is a collection of human knowledge -scientists and philosophers debate exactly how to define science and what scientific method is

Remains at the heart of scientific thinking today as every scientific claim, depends on evidence Knowledge is based on experience and experimentation Experimental science is paradigm of knowledge Experience and experiment rarely if ever produce certainty Some empiricists believe that maths can be certain

The senses can sometimes deceive us so empirical evidence is flawed Mind should be starting point for knowledge rather then senses Knowledge is based on use of reason or logic Maths paradigm of knowledge Genuine knowledge is certain Relation to experience, -experience doesn’t produce certainty and doesn’t conform, to reason )experience is at best second class knowledge

-Key Idea: Knowledge is primarily derived from sensory experiences and observation of the external world. -Methodology: Empiricists believe in the importance of empirical evidence gained through observation, experimentation, and direct sensory perception. -Example Thinkers: John Locke, David Hume, and George Berkeley were prominent empiricists who emphasized the role of sense perception in understanding the world.

-Key Idea: Knowledge is primarily gained through reason, logic, and innate mental structures. -Methodology: Rationalists assert that certain truths are known intuitively or through deductive reasoning, independent of sensory experiences. -Example Thinkers: René Descartes, Baruch Spinoza, and Gottfried Leibniz were notable rationalists who emphasized the power of human reason to uncover universal truths.

-set of premises that move towards a conclusion that’s not logically necessary but only probable -a posteriori as premises and conclusion are dependent on external evidence or experience -conclusion of proof not contained within the premises - synthetic

-Observe and gather evidence for what has been examined. -Analyse the evidence and draw conclusions in a hypothesis. -Devise experiments to test out the hypothesis. -Modify the hypothesis if necessary. -Argue for a theory that will explain the evidence/results. -Once there is a theory, use deduction to predict things that should be theoretically correct. Establish tests to verify/disprove the theory.

-set on premises that move towards a logically necessary conclusion • a priori as conclusion isn’t dependent on external evidence or experience -doesn’t conclude anything that’s not already contained in original premises - analytic

-Does not depend on variable or misunderstood experience. -It accepts that words and definitions have fixed and agreed meanings. -No alternative conclusions

-Relies on experience that may be universal, or at least testable. -It’s flexible – there is more than one possible conclusion. -Does not demand that we accept definitions as fixed.

-Leads to apparently necessary conclusions – why is this a weakness? -Depends on acceptance of the premises being analytically true.

-Depends on our acceptance of the nature of the evidence. -Demands overwhelmingly good reasons for accepting that the conclusion is the most probable. -Alternative conclusion may be just as likely.

the view that science alone can give true knowledge of reality; that it alone can determine what is meaningful, and that eventually, it will explain everything. Such an approach tends to ignore the contribution of the arts, psychology and emotions.

-The “God of the gaps” is a term used to describe a theological perspective where God’s existence is used to explain phenomena that science has not yet been able to understand. -For example, in the past, when people couldn’t explain certain natural phenomena through scientific understanding, they might attribute it to the direct intervention of God. -As science progresses and provides natural explanations for these phenomena, the “gap” where God was once placed diminishes.

-An ordered universe suggests that it might have been created by an intelligent designer. -Deism is therefore the belief in an intelligent but impersonal creator: one who creates the universe then leaves it to its own free devices.

offers a religious way of explaining the predictable nature of the universe; cannot easily be challenged by science (once God has set the mechanism working, he leaves it to its own devices).

the Christian idea of God is personal not impersonal; an impersonal deistic idea of God is just an intellectual idea (John Polkinghorne).

Humans create their own personal reality through the choices they make. The world can be shaped by individual commitments and values. It enables key questions to be asked about the meaning and purpose of life.

-faith as a matter of personal commitment and not related to scientific fact; religion offers a set of beliefs and symbols that provide meaning and purpose in life. -In other words, Christianity is concerned with existentialist questions rather than scientific questions.