Review Of Steven Weinberg's Essay 'Without God'

Superior Essays
Science and Religion: Uncompromising war?

A critique “God, Science, and Imagination” by Wendell Berry is a bombardment review on “Without God” by Steven Weinberg. The author refutes the claim – nonexistence of God by Steven Weinberg citing everyone has his/her opinion to put forward and the essay “Without God” is a mere opinion of Steven. The author is right that everyone has his/her opinion about God and science and it a never ending debate, however, everyone should respect the opposing ideas and they should not be hurting each others. While the author criticizes about Prof. Weinberg’s opinion, he overlooks the achievements and progression human passed through from scientific discoveries.

It is always better to cite anything with third person prospectus. The author condemns the way Weinberg talked about religion while mentioning that he didn’t want to hurt anyone but fairer view recognizes that Weinberg, being as a physicist, has more to contribute to science than religion and his approach not to hurt the feeling of theists is appreciable. Why would a physicist support about the unknown fact about
…show more content…
There are certain things which cannot be just proved by science and there are other things which cannot be just disproved by religion. It means neither the dogmatism of fundamentalist of religion has physical evidences that can be proved or disproved nor the bigotry of fundamentalist of science has power of imagination that can realize the irreducible God. Forgetting those dogmas, we can live in the world which can have science and religion hand in hand. Science and religion both has its own significance. One cannot ignore the power of imagination of religious belief and the other cannot condone the achievement of discovery as we no more in Stone

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    The article published by Jerry Coyne, titled, Science and Religion Aren’t Friends, is one that demands that science and religion are incompatible, and he makes an attempt to destroy any possibility of compatibility between the two. He claims that religion is merely a fog of superstition that needs to get out of the way of scientific progress. “ And any progress- not just scientific progress- is easier when we’re not yoked to religious dogma.” Coyne argues for the value of science, a value that doesn’t have various religions arguing with one another about which one is right, there is simply one scientific truth. “In contrast, scientists don’t kill each other over matters such as continental drift. We have better ways to settle our differences.…

    • 754 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Religion Vs. Science

    • 1922 Words
    • 8 Pages

    In religion, “where truths cannot be demonstrated, we accept them as a matter of faith” (Mead 173). When something could not be answered in science, it is left unsolved and not accepted until further attempt. With religion, however, when something can’t be explained, it is accepted by faith even if there is no explanation to prove it. Religion and science both provide something that the other doesn’t. For instance, religion provides us with hope.…

    • 1922 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Like the missionaries, Professor Weinberg grants the authority to his own opinions and try to convert his opponents. As a physicist, he does not use the scientific procedure to prove the nonexistence of the God, but simply writes an article assuming the unknowable things with the absolute confidence. There is no objective evidence on either the existence or the…

    • 1399 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    For science, God is not required to explain any phenomena and that there isn’t a purpose for the creation of things. Everything that created is therefore created because of random chance, as opposed to something creating it with a specific design or purpose in mind. For intelligent design, God created the universe and everything in it, and God intervenes in nature frequently and indefinitely. Therefore, it can be concluded that there is a fundamental conflict between science and religion. This is due to the contradiction between the divine truth and the scientific truth.…

    • 1341 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The major laws are explanation, prediction, testability, confirmation, and falsifiability. These laws help us disseminate between science and non-science. Religion does not follow the natural laws of science, since religious beliefs violate the “law” with the notion of miracles. Miracles are believed to be true events that happened, with no explanation for the phenomenon. Ruse says, “Science is about unbroken, natural regularity.…

    • 1048 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This approach is actually used often throughout science to affirm things we cannot see or touch such as electrons and black holes. God is the best explanation, but not necessarily the only explanation. The second important thing to remember is that yes, these arguments are defeasible, meaning that it is possible they could be wrong. However, atheists and McCloskey have yet to provide a defeater for our arguments. We as Christians could be wrong, but someone has yet to prove us 100 percent wrong.…

    • 742 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Rather, there are only conflicts between science and natural claims without evidence. To clarify, the introduction of evolutionary biology does not challenge religion itself. An elaborate theory of evolution does not challenge faith attitudes, belief in supernatural creation, nor belief in ultimate purpose. However, it absolutely does challenge several interpretations held in religious communities. The vital keyword of this statement is “interpretation.” There is no objective method to interpret any particular religious text, so it’s illogical to say any single interpretation is the correct one.…

    • 1345 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    People don’t believe in God based on an argument. The belief is simply that, something one just knows to be true, like that the world didn't just pop into existence five seconds ago. Therefore, there is no conflict between the two. On the contrary, there does seem to be a conflict between a particular religion, naturalism and science (evolution). Naturalism is the belief that there isn't any such person as God.…

    • 853 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Hence why we question or doubt theology and his testimony. With this in mind, not everything that happens in the world is in God’s control or will. Along with science being used as a tool of communication, this is Polkinghorne’s bottom line…

    • 1212 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Both the scientific community, and religious faithful forget the truthful fact, that neither side can ever be correct. Science is mostly based around theories that are constantly changing, while religion is based on teachings from the Holy Book. Science today features possibilities of genetic engineering and other ways to alter life that religious followers view as unethical. The lack of long term studies should lead to a healthy skepticism of the future of scientific discovery, as there could exist potential repercussions for altering life. Furthermore, the religious community should learn to embrace the possibilities that science holds, because it, like religion, preaches hope for a better tomorrow.…

    • 1476 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays