Analysis Of Science And Religion Aren T Friends By Jerry Coyne

Good 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. …show more content…
However, the point I would like to make it that science too doesn’t have all the answers, no matter which scientist proves that their evidence is correct and cannot be doubted, there are still flaws in science today. I believe that Coyne argues from a more naturalistic and materialistic point of view. These points of view, however fog the way for Biblical and religious compatibility to science. As one of his points he discusses the topic of evolution, and the point he makes is evolution shows evidence of no soul or spirit. However, there are three points that I would like to make against evolution; the first being, that if humans are the products of evolution then humans are simply physical things. Humans posses thought which are non-physical things. Therefore, humans are not the products of evolution. Another argument, discusses moral values; if evolution is true then there could be no objective moral values, but there are objective moral values. Lastly, in regards to the purpose of life; if evolution is true then there is no meaning and purpose of life, however there is clear meaning and purpose of life, so therefore, evolution is false. This is where I believe the Bible and religion can come into the

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Religion Vs. Science

    • 1922 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Humans have spiritual needs that can be dealt by religion but not by science. In summary, religion isn 't good at dealing with scientific issues just as science isn 't good at dealing with religious issues. Conflicts between religion and science arise when people try to use religion to deal with issues best handled by science and when scientists try to use science to deal with issues best handled by religion. This conflict could be easily be avoided by personal choice if oneself refuses to…

    • 1922 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Still, Behe’s bias disqualifies his argument from bearing the title of science. A supernatural cause is not one that can be reliably tested to any extent, and it is immune to falsifiability. Behe’s leap from natural evidence to the existence of God is a personal choice with no natural evidence to support it. If he intended to stay within the realms of science, then it would be necessary to draw a natural conclusion. One way to do this is by suggesting the Darwinian evolution mechanism is incapable of explaining the complexity of several biological complexes.…

    • 1345 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    is unacceptable for scientific reasons, the second (ii. or iii.) for epistemological reasons. Let’s start with the former. The problem here is that we don’t have, Street says, an account for how the evolution pushed us towards the independent moral truths because the best scientific attempts to explain how the evolutionary past influenced our moral judgments do not make any reference to the moral truths.…

    • 1082 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Dawkins: Writing In recent discussion of Dawkins’ “Arguments about God’s existence”, a controversial issue has been whether he offers a strong and valid argument about religion. Some argue that his paper is filled with false assertions about religion and the existence of God. From this perspective, Dawkins is proving that God doesn’t exist on false claims such as heredity and Agnostic beliefs. On the other hand, however, others argue that his arguments stem from logic and reason. That one needs evidence to prove that something exists and a lack of evidence against God not existing doesn’t prove that God does exist.…

    • 937 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The debunker claims that since evolution selects for fitness rather than moral truth, we cannot trust our moral beliefs to be objective, and that we must require a Good Reason to back up all our moral beliefs. This not only knocks out moral realism, or at least leaves it crippled and ineffective, but also leads down the road to pure…

    • 766 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Wendell Berry argues against this strict fundamentalism in his essay, “God, Science, and Imagination”, where he discusses that reaching a balance between the two extremes of science and religion is important to eliminate the bigotry the world faces. Zadie…

    • 1476 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    This is due to the contradiction between the divine truth and the scientific truth. Intelligent design says that it is not compatible with science because if the divine truth is indeed true, then science is wrong and therefore not needed. On the other hand, science says the truth can only be reached through research. That is, everything can be logically explained through a qualitative and quantitative…

    • 1341 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    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…

    • 945 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Thirdly, a scientific theory has to meet the demands of testability, confirmation and falsification. Ruse claims that creation scientists do not try to disprove creationism theories, rather they attempt to disprove evolution science in order to benefit their own views. Fourthly, a scientific theory must be tentative. Essentially, creation scientists must be open to the possibility of their theories being proved incorrect if conflicting evidence were presented. And lastly, creation scientists must uphold scientific theories with integrity.…

    • 1255 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    According to Popper, any theory can be proven false through empirical evidence or experimental data but cannot be proven true. In this view, any theory is always in the state of being not yet disproved. However, Kuhn thinks that in normal science the theory is not questioned until “the crisis stage” in the Kuhn Cycle. Kuhn claims that scientists does not try to refute their theories instead they try to prove them and seek evidence for their theories whereas Popper claims that scientists try to…

    • 944 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays