# Science Vs Religion



## Neutral Singh (Mar 16, 2005)

Similarities, Differences? I know it is constantly argued that Science is not at all similar to Religion but I would like more explanation on why. Just wondering...


----------



## S|kH (Mar 16, 2005)

First you have to define exactly what you think "Religion" is.

Is it just a belief in a diety or having faith in something without the facts to prove it? If so, than many passages in Sikhism and Buddhism probably shouldn't be considered "religion".

Also, people claim they have faith in things or believe in certain things without the aspect of religion. 

Take Buddhism for example where everything is on a trial basis, and since its a "mind reformation" program, it doesn't necessarily work on everyone and there are cases which can't be explained. But, if you do practice the techniques, it may or may not work for you, its for you to test and find out. This is evidence, there is no faith here...The Buddha said you can test and find out if it works for you, he also said that its been tested by him and many other people before and after him that vouch and say the given technique does work to  release mental stress. Now, when so many cases appear, is that considered evidence? If so, than why is Buddhism still considered a "religion" ? 

Even in Science, Evolutionists took Darwins theory and are trying to apply it to every case, but they do not know if it will work with everyone or every specific case they look at. In this way, they have faith, that hopefully Darwin is right, and they are testing it out to see if it works (evidence). So can Evolution be a religion ?

There's alot of gray lines on this topic, and the major differences occur when what you think defines the term "religion."


----------



## justrandeepsingh (Mar 21, 2005)

This is a simple issue.

All truths eminate from God.
Therefor, all truths, whether scientific or religious cannot contradict one another. Because God cannot contradict Himself.

So, if any part of Sikhism contradicts a scientific claim, either it is the science that is wrong or it is Sikhism.


----------



## Amarpal (Mar 21, 2005)

Dear Khalsa Ji,

Science is a way to seek truth in nature. Religion is a path to search the truth behind nature. 

The science looks at a smaller and smallar level. Religion tries to grasp the toality of creation as one. 

Science is based on analysis. Religion  tries to synthesise. 

Science is mostly through perception observation and demonstration. Religion mostly is intuition and logic.

The two appear to be two poles but it is not so.

If you conceptualise the God as 'Cosmic Intelligence'. Science and Religion both become paths to understand and reach the same. 

One i.e. the science follows the route of understanding the observed by splitting into smaller and smaller entities; while the other i.e. the religion tries to integrate and fuse what is observed.

With love and respect for all.

Amarpal Singh


----------



## Arvind (Mar 21, 2005)

Amarpal said:
			
		

> Science is based on analysis. Religion is tries to synthesise.


I like this.  

Amarpal ji, your way of explanation in simple words, is the thing, I admire a lot  

Regards.


----------



## Amarpal (Mar 21, 2005)

Dear Arvind Ji,

It is all 'The Sat'. I am only an instrument, a sevadaar.

With love and respect for all.

Amarpal Singh


----------



## Lee (May 18, 2005)

justrandeepsingh said:
			
		

> This is a simple issue.
> 
> All truths eminate from God.
> Therefor, all truths, whether scientific or religious cannot contradict one another. Because God cannot contradict Himself.



Justrandeepsingh,

Heh I'm not sure on this one, do younot find that the World is full of contradictions.  How can God be a part of, yet apart from Gods creation?  

Or perhaps it is true to say that our understanding of contradictions is not yet full?

Any how I believe your self and Amarpal have it right.  Science and religion are just two parts of the myriad ways in which we try to understand the universe around us, and our place in it, or to put it another way, God and Gods plan.

Cheers,

Lee.


----------



## Arvind (May 18, 2005)

Lee said:
			
		

> Or perhaps it is true to say that our understanding of contradictions is not yet full?


I tend to agree with this.


----------



## justrandeepsingh (May 20, 2005)

Lee said:
			
		

> Justrandeepsingh,
> 
> Heh I'm not sure on this one, do younot find that the World is full of contradictions. How can God be a part of, yet apart from Gods creation?
> 
> ...



Lee,

Nothing is an actual contradiction. People may be contradictory, but that means that they are hypocrits or liars. Never in nature will you find an actual contradiction, like 1=2. I agree with  your statement that something might seem contradictory, but that's because we do not know it in full. For instance, the notion that the Sun rises contradicts the fact that the earth revolves around the sun. In that case, the sun is not actually rising, but only appears so from our vantage point, there is no contradiction.

--Sincerely,


----------



## Lee (Jul 14, 2005)

justrandeepsingh said:
			
		

> Lee,
> 
> Nothing is an actual contradiction. People may be contradictory, but that means that they are hypocrits or liars. Never in nature will you find an actual contradiction, like 1=2. I agree with your statement that something might seem contradictory, but that's because we do not know it in full. For instance, the notion that the Sun rises contradicts the fact that the earth revolves around the sun. In that case, the sun is not actually rising, but only appears so from our vantage point, there is no contradiction.
> 
> --Sincerely,



Yes I also belive this.  In the wider context of science being evidance based, and religion being faith based I have this to say:

All that we know scientificly is based upon human observation, to my mind this does not constitute evidance, or proof.  Why?  Because our senses and thus our perception of the universe around us, is only one way of looking at things.  I have talked before of the ficticous realms of dog science and fly science.  To a dog scientist, there would be no such thing as colour, to a fly scientist scent would be a better basis for observational science.

Now we as humans know that there is such a thing as colour (or at least differing lenthgs of visible and invisible light)  Does this make our science better, or more true than dog science?  I guess it does, but does it mean that what we percive is actualy the truth of the way things really are?  I like to think not.

What does this mean given the original question?  All that we know is based on faith, we can't know the truth, heh unless via God.

Cheers,

Lee.


----------



## CaramelChocolate (Jul 14, 2005)

I am doing religious studies at A level and someone in my class put a sign on the wall saying "Science and religion can never be in conflict as they have one creator: GOD."

I disagree with this, but I would like to point out one similarity with religion and science, they are BOTH provision. Yes science is even provisional.

Let me give you an example of how they both contradict... yet again I will mention an issue close to my heart - homosexuality. No matter what religious people say it is immoral. Science says it is natural, Muslims claim science works with Islam, but say homosexuality is wrong. Religious groups or psychology hasn't even been able to 'cure' homosexuality, and when they are tried to be cured they often end up comitting suicide.
Personally I think the man is much deeper than what science/psychology would say rather than man being a complex of hormones and chemicals.


----------



## Jogindar Singh Kaur (Jul 14, 2005)

I like Amarpalji's answer a LOT, too.  

My 2 cents:

I've worked with medicine-related scientists all my life in both clinical and basic research.  What is science?  The discovery of objective phenomenon which is both logical and confirmable through observation and experimentation that can be repeated.  Note that this is OBJECTIVE phenomena, and it is limited by what the information our senses can obtain.  We've made spectacular process in extending our senses (ie, telescopes, linear accelerators, electron microscopes, spectrometers, spaceships, etc) and in fact dog scientists WOULD find the same electromagnetic spectrum as we have, only they'd have a rather small band of visible light.  There is much to science, but for the most part you have to ask of any discovery:  is it objective?  Is it empirical?  Is the phenomena repeatable?  When science makes mistakes, then its assumptions can be changed.  

Religion OTOH is the SUBJECTIVE relationship between humans and the natural world (some would say that's spirituality, but I think they're splitting hairs).  The subjective natural world both the inner and outer parts of the self and the universe.  Whether or not you choose to believe in a God (or many gods) as part of that is almost immaterial in this broad sense.  However, we do have many religious traditions that spring forth from men and women whose subjective experiences have brought them incredible insight into this relationship between the self and nature.  The Gurus are all incredible examples of these kinds of people.  

I think science only becomes dangerous when it becomes tied to the quick buck.  Profit has no morals, and science can far too easily be used (or ignored!) for nefarious purposes.  

I think relgion becomes dangerous when its followers decide that it is the Pure Truth and shut their minds to any other way of thinking.  They can only conclude that people who follow other paths are only worthy of death.  Unfortunately, as we have all too often experienced, it is far too easy to convince your followers to close their minds and destroy blindly.  

This is another reason I chose Sikhism; it is one of the most tolerant religions in the world and comes from a long tradition of truly intelligent and thoughtful mystics and sants.  I don't think it is a coincidence that Sikhi is the most scientifically enlightened of all religions; it is a religion that encourages its followers to THINK.  

I do believe all religions CAN learn tolerance toward one another; after all, there is really only one God.  Even Pagans, Wiccans and Hindus say that all gods and goddesses are but aspects of the One Creator.  And since God is love, then anyone who embraces their capacity to love all understands spirituality, even if s/he considers themself an athiest, humanist or Buddhist.

Science without morality leads to destruction and death.  Religion without the intelligence that science exemplifies also leads to destruction and death.  And that exactly is how they are related in my wordview.


----------



## Lee (Jul 15, 2005)

Joginder Ji,

I fully agree with you also, Caramel Chocolate whenyou say that you disagree with the sign in your classroom, are you saying that science and religion can be min conflict or that science does not come from God?

We have talked about contradictions before, I am of the opionion that there are no contradictions, just that we cannopt fully comprehend what is going on.  An example:

Would you say that God is perfect?  I would as would I suspect many 'Theists' 
Wait though, to be perfect means you need no more work done to you, but if God is all, and the universe is constantly changing, then God is constantly changing, and therefore cannot be perfect.

Now I don't belive that God is not perfect, therein lies the contradiction.  It is not a contradiction though, it just means that my understanding of God is not perfect.  I see contradiction, only because I do not have all of the facts.

Cheers,

Lee.


----------



## Jogindar Singh Kaur (Jul 16, 2005)

Lee said:
			
		

> Wait though, to be perfect means you need no more work done to you, but if God is all, and the universe is constantly changing, then God is constantly changing, and therefore cannot be perfect.
> Lee.



But perfection CAN change! It is just another form of perfection.  Take a perfect rosebud, is it less perfect when it fully blooms?  Is it "more" perfect?  Perhaps it is just two different states of perfection.   :wink:


----------



## Lee (Jul 18, 2005)

Jogindar Singh Kaur said:
			
		

> But perfection CAN change! It is just another form of perfection. Take a perfect rosebud, is it less perfect when it fully blooms? Is it "more" perfect? Perhaps it is just two different states of perfection. :wink:



Heh good point Jogindar Ji,

Then again, a rose bud when it opens is not a rosebud any more but a rose.
So while it can be said that the rose bud has changed, it has not become a more perfect rosebud, but a rose instead.

Cheers,

lee.


----------



## devinesanative (Dec 16, 2005)

Both Science and Religion are complementary to each other . Both do the Analysis and Synthsis .

But Science does it in a Concrete Way , It is action oriented.

Religion does it in a Abstract Way , It is a Theory and Thesis Oriented.

Both have one this common ie Philosophy and Philosophy is driven by *Common Sense* and When Common Sense goes beyond Threshold Limits then *Sixth Sense* Develops and When Sixth Sense Goes beyond Threshold Limits then a person becomes *Devine or Spiritual* in Religious Terms and a *Scientist* like *Eintein* and *Newton* in Scientific Terms.

_The following line by Jogin Kaur Ji perfectly right :_
_Science without morality leads to destruction and death. Religion without the intelligence that science exemplifies also leads to destruction and death. And that exactly is how they are related in my wordview._


----------



## vsgrewal48895 (Jul 31, 2009)

*Science & Faith*​ 
Sikh Faith believes in the natural, in the unbroken and unbreakable succession of cause and effect under the Will of Absolute Principle/Truth (Akal Purkh). To live under the Will of God is to accept the present as is. It is not liking or unliking the facts of the present (or a situation) but accepting it as Its Will.Guru Arjan in Raag Kanrha ponders;

ਅਨਿਕ ਪੂਜਾ ਮੈ ਬਹੁ ਬਿਧਿ ਖੋਜੀ ਸਾ ਪੂਜਾ ਜਿ ਹਰਿ ਭਾਵਾਸਿ ॥

_Anik pūjā mai baho biḏẖ kẖojī sā pūjā jė har bẖāvās._

I have studied countless ways of worship in all sorts of ways, but that alone is worship, which is pleasing to the Akal Purkh's Will. ------Guru Arjan, Raag Kanrha, AGGS, Page, 1304-7

Guru Nanak’s philosophy always teaches about seeking (searching/science) and spirituality/Divine klnowledge as he ponders in Raag Malar and Guru Arjan about evolution IMHO in Raag Gauri;

ਖੋਜੀ ਉਪਜੈ ਬਾਦੀ ਬਿਨਸੈ ਹਉ ਬਲਿ ਬਲਿ ਗੁਰ ਕਰਤਾਰਾ ॥

_Kẖojī upjai bāḏī binsai ha▫o bal bal gur karṯārā._

The seeker comes forth, and the debater dies down; I am a sacrifice, a sacrifice to the Guru, the Creator Akal Purkh. ------Guru Nanak, Raag Malar, AGGS, Page, 1255-6

ਕਈ ਜਨਮ ਭਏ ਕੀਟ ਪਤੰਗਾ ॥ ਕਈ ਜਨਮ ਗਜ ਮੀਨ ਕੁਰੰਗਾ ॥ ਕਈ ਜਨਮ ਪੰਖੀ ਸਰਪ ਹੋਇਓ ॥ ਕਈ ਜਨਮ ਹੈਵਰ ਬ੍ਰਿਖ ਜੋਇਓ ॥ਮਿਲੁ ਜਗਦੀਸ ਮਿਲਨ ਕੀ ਬਰੀਆ ॥ਚਿਰੰਕਾਲ ਇਹ ਦੇਹ ਸੰਜਰੀਆ ॥ ਕਈ ਜਨਮ ਸੈਲ ਗਿਰਿ ਕਰਿਆ ॥ ਕਈ ਜਨਮ ਗਰਭ ਹਿਰਿ ਖਰਿਆ ॥ ਕਈ ਜਨਮ ਸਾਖ ਕਰਿ ਉਪਾਇਆ ॥ਲਖ ਚਉਰਾਸੀਹ ਜੋਨਿ ਭ੍ਰਮਾਇਆ ॥ਸਾਧਸੰਗਿ ਭਇਓ ਜਨਮੁ ਪਰਾਪਤਿ ॥ਕਰਿ ਸੇਵਾ ਭਜੁ ਹਰਿ ਹਰਿ ਗੁਰਮਤਿ ॥

_Kayee Janam Bha-ay Keett Patangaa, “Kayee Janam Meen Kurangaa, Kayee Janam Pankhee Sarap Hooeyoo, Kayee Janam Haivar Birkh Jooeyoo, Mil Jagdeesh Milan Kee Baree-aa, Chirankaal Eh Deh Sanjaree-aa, Kayee Janam Sail Gir Kariaa, Kayee Janam Garabh Hir Khariaa, Kayee Janam Saakh Kar Oupaaey-aa, Lakh Chauraasee Joan Bharmaaey-aa, Saadh Sung Bhaeo Janam Praapat, Kar Seva Bhaj Har Har Gurmat._

In so many incarnations, you were a worm and an insect. In so many incarnations, you were an elephant, a fish and a deer. In so many incarnations, you were a bird and a snake. In so many incarnations, you were yoked as an ox and a horse. Now it is time to meet the Creator of the Universe. After so very long, this human body was fashioned for you. In so many incarnations, you were rocks and mountains; in so many incarnations, you were aborted in the womb. In so many incarnations, you developed branches and leaves. You wandered through 8.4 million incarnations (evolution). Through the Sadh Sangat, the Company of the Holy, you obtained this human life. Do seva, selfless service; and vibrate the Akal Purkh's Name. -----Guru Arjan, Raag Gauri Guareri, AGGS, Page, 176

Religion and science can co-exist with a little tolerance and rationality and mutual respect. Humans should enjoy the strides of science, while enjoying the comforts provided by being humble towards that unfathomable, incomprehensible Higher Power. 

There is no absolute scientific proof of the presence of The Infinite God; henceforth It’s subtle essence cannot be obtained by any one. Religion and science will always clash due to perceived insults to the research and rationality by non progressive individuals. Spirituality was the domain of the faith but lately science has developed with close alignment. God cannot be completely contained with in nature and therefore God’s existence is out side the science’s ability to weigh in. Scientists are not blind believers but make a critical analysis of the evidence, quite opposite to the religious approach based on blind faith and belief. On the other hand because something is vastly improbable, we need a God to explain it. Since we are profoundly ignorant about certain things we need to work on them like understanding the physiology of conscience to reduce human suffering of pain and depression. 

Can the religion stand up to the progress of science is the main question?

Science is the real redeemer. It will put honesty above hypocrisy; mental veracity above all belief. It will teach the religion of usefulness. It will destroy bigotry in all its forms. It will put thoughtful doubt above thoughtless faith. We know that science has given us all we have of value. Science is the only civilizer. It has freed the slave, clothed the naked, fed the hungry, lengthened life, given us homes and hearths, pictures and books, ships and railways, telegraphs and cables, engines that tirelessly turn the countless wheels, and it has destroyed the superstition. 

Science and medical technology and knowledge has prolonged the average life span of humans in many countries. Does it mean that people are becoming more virtuous and God is blessing them back by extension in their life span?

*Conclusion;* 

Science ends, when reason fails, but spirituality is there all the time. One can be spiritual by subjugating the lower instincts of Lust, Anger, Greed, Attachment, and Ego with further development of the virtues of Truth, Compassion, Contentment, Faith in the existence of Higher Power, and Fortitude with evolvement of good moral character, which in itself is Divine Knowledge. 

Virinder S. Grewal


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Dec 17, 2010)

SCIENCEv/s RELIGION

In this connection we must have clear concept of definition of SCIENCE and RELIGION then only we can present views against or favour in Science or Religion.

WHAT IS SCIENCE?

Science covers the broad field of knowledge that deals with observed facts and relationship among those facts.Thus SCIENCE simply means KNOWLEDGE.Science helps in developing theories based on knowledge of facts but the theory is accepted only after the facts are verified experimentally.Scientific knowledge is always growing and improving.

WHAT IS RELIGION?

No simple definition can be given to RELIGION as there can be or are numerous religions in the world depending upon different beliefs estabshed in different times in different places.

Considering above definitions only RELIGION which deals with the KNOWLEDGE  of the UNFORESEEN CREATOR OF THE UNIVERSE can be considered to be Scientific and the facts stated in the RELIGION should be verifiable and experimentable.

Therefore we should now find which RELIGION can be Scientific.This Should be a Religion meeting the defintional requirement of Science.

As a persnal view I may say that the Philosophy of Sikh Religion is very close to Science because the Sikh philosophy is based on KNODLEDGE,the facts of which can be verifified and experimented as well.

With best wishes to all
Prakash.S.bagga


----------

