dissertation science et religion

Le conflit entre science et religion est-il inévitable ?

Professor of Geography and Intellectual History, Queen's University Belfast

Emeritus Professor of Science and Religion, University of Oxford

Disclosure statement

Les auteurs de cet article ont débattu de ce sujet le 25 octobre 2018 dans le cadre d'une série de débats sur les défis mondiaux de l'Université Queen's de Belfast.

Queen's University Belfast provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation UK.

University of Oxford provides funding as a member of The Conversation UK.

View all partners

Dans son ouvrage écrit en 2015, Faith versus Fact , le biologiste et polémiste Jerry Coyne lançait une de ses nombreuses attaques contre les religions et ce, au nom de la science: science et religion, disait-il, « ne peuvent cohabiter, de la même manière que raison et déraison ne peuvent le faire ».

Ce genre de généralités se retrouve fréquemment au fil des siècles, faisant souvent référence à la condamnation de Galilée par l’Église catholique romaine en 1633, ou encore à la dispute au sujet de l’évolution survenue à Oxford en 1860 entre T. H. Huxley et l’évêque Samuel Wilberforce.

Ce type d’énoncé rejoint également la sphère publique. Le 16 septembre 2008, le professeur Michael Reiss, un biologiste évolutionniste, a démissionné de son poste de directeur de l’éducation de la Royal Society. Son départ était en lien avec des propos tenus sur l’enseignement scientifique des origines. Il aurait dit: « Le créationnisme doit être évalué par les scientifiques non comme une idée fausse, mais bien comme une vision du monde. »

Peu avant cette démission, le prix Nobel Sir Richard Roberts, avait écrit au président de la Royal Society, Sir Martin Rees, exigeant « la démission ou le renvoi dès que possible du professeur Reiss ». « Nous constatons que le professeur Reiss est un ecclésiastique, ce qui est inquiétant en soi ». Sa lettre se poursuit ainsi:

Qui donc a pu s’imaginer qu’il puisse être un bon directeur de l’éducation, qualifié pour répondre à des questions sur les différences entre science et religion de manière scientifique et rationnelle?

Commentant cet incident dans la revue New Scientist , un autre Nobélisé, Sir Harold Krolo, de poursuivre:

Il est impensable qu’un pasteur, dont la pensée centrale repose en grande partie, sinon en totalité, sur un dogme invérifiable, puisse présenter avec honnêteté et impartialité un argumentaire scientifique fondé sur la libre pensée et le doute.

Complications

Ces affirmations suggèrent implicitement l’inévitable combat opposant science et religion. Mais ce postulat ne peut en soi faire comprendre l’infinie diversité des liens tissés entre science et religion.

Les sciences sont nombreuses, les religions tout autant. Une découverte scientifique peut s’avérer problématique pour certaines religions, mais sans conséquence pour d’autres. Une science peut menacer des croyances religieuses, alors que d’autres sont ressenties comme anodines. Soutenir qu’il existerait un conflit fondamental entre science et religion est voué à l’échec, car comme l'a écrit le philosophe John Gray, les mots « religion » et « athéisme » sont dépourvus d’essence.

Si les sciences peuvent parfois fournir des réponses aux interrogations soulevées par les traditions religieuses, il reste néanmoins un espace pour le questionnement et l’engagement religieux. Comment sont établies les priorités en recherche? Compte tenu de ressources limitées, nous nous devons en premier lieu de déterminer ce qui est le plus important pour l’humanité.

Il ne s’agit pas ici de raisonnement scientifique. Tel que l’historien Noah Yuval Harari l’a décrit dans son livre à succès Sapiens , seules les religions et les idéologies peuvent répondre à ces interrogations: « La recherche ne peut s’épanouir qu’au travers d’un lien à une religion ou une idéologie ».

Parce que science et religion sont à la fois interdépendantes et conflictuelles, l'histoire de leur interaction est complexe.

Points chauds et zones d’échange

On trouve historiquement de nombreuses situations où science et religion se sont opposées. Appelons-les « points chauds ». Parmi ceux-ci, le refus des miracles par les tenants du point de vue que la nature fonctionne selon des lois incontournables . Ou encore le déni de la liberté humaine prôné par ceux qui voient l‘esprit de l’être humain comme un simple assemblage chimique du cerveau.

Au début du 17ème siècle, certains catholiques jugèrent les théories matérialistes troublantes car elles entraient en conflit avec leur interprétation de l’Eucharistie. Pour certains Juifs, le bannissement de l’astrologie entre les années 200 et 500 AD constituait une entrave à la recherche astronomique. Quant à ceux qui interprètent la bible de façon littérale, la théorie de l’évolution selon Darwin déclenche un réflexe de rejet.

Par contre, l’on trouve bien des points d’entente et d’enrichissement réciproque. Appelons-les « zones d’échange ». Par exemple, l’idée biblique que l’humanité descendrait d’une source unique. Cette pensée a mené à une réflexion sur l'origine du langage ainsi que sur la dispersion des êtres humains sur la planète .

Au 17ème siècle, certaines inventions scientifiques telles que le télescope et le microscope étaient destinées à inverser la chute d'Adam de son piédestal . Ces instruments et leur méthodologie scientifique furent conçus afin de réparer les capacités cognitives et sensorielles de l’être humain, endommagées par le péché.

Regardons le débat sur la création du monde. Cette idée constitue la pierre angulaire du développement de la science écologique . C’est en partie grâce à la croyance que Dieu aurait adapté animaux et plantes à leur environnement qu'ont été rédigés des traités essentiels d’histoire naturelle soulignant les corrélations entre organismes et environnement.

De nos jours, un dialogue entre anthropologues théologiques et partisans du transhumanisme – qui prônent l’usage de la science et de la technique afin d’améliorer la condition humaine – pourrait être bénéfique. Les avancées technologiques soulèvent de profondes questions sur le sens de l’humanité, un sujet sur lequel les théologiens ont beaucoup à dire. Au minimum, la théologie peut contribuer à l’élaboration des valeurs en vertu desquelles devraient être priorisées les capacités humaines qu’il convient d’améliorer.

La survie de la religion

Chacun répondant à des impératifs différents, le risque de tensions, dissensions, et même d’animosité entre religieux et scientifiques demeurera omniprésent. Mais cela ne veut pas dire que la guerre est inévitable. La science laisse indifférents de nombreux croyants. Et beaucoup de scientifiques se distancient de la religion. La méfiance réciproque est souvent de mise. Mais - et j’insiste - l’indifférence, la distanciation et la méfiance ne sont pas la même chose que la guerre.

Les mots « science » et « religion » ont subi de profondes transformations sémantiques. Ce n’est qu’à partir de la seconde moitié du 19ème siècle que la « science » est devenue une sorte de parapluie de convenance regroupant des domaines empiriques spécialisés, supposément mais pas toujours, liés par une « méthodologie scientifique » commune.

Les religions peuvent-elles survivre à notre société technologique? C’est déjà le cas, et ce pour une raison fort importante. Elles fournissent une identité, et cherchent à donner un sens aux événements, à interpréter l’univers, pas nécessairement à le comprendre. Comme le disait Terry Eagleton : « L’erreur consistant à croire que la religion serait une tentative ratée d’explication du monde… équivaut à considérer le ballet comme une tentative ratée de rattraper l’autobus. »

This article was originally published in English

Research Fellow

Senior Research Fellow - Women's Health Services

Lecturer / Senior Lecturer - Marketing

Assistant Editor - 1 year cadetship

Executive Dean, Faculty of Health

• Table of Contents
• Random Entry
• Chronological
• Editorial Information
• About the SEP
• Editorial Board
• How to Cite the SEP
• Special Characters
• Advanced Tools
• Support the SEP
• PDFs for SEP Friends
• Make a Donation
• SEPIA for Libraries
• Entry Contents

Bibliography

Academic tools.

• Friends PDF Preview
• Author and Citation Info
• Back to Top

Religion and Science

The relationship between religion and science is the subject of continued debate in philosophy and theology. To what extent are religion and science compatible? Are religious beliefs sometimes conducive to science, or do they inevitably pose obstacles to scientific inquiry? The interdisciplinary field of “science and religion”, also called “theology and science”, aims to answer these and other questions. It studies historical and contemporary interactions between these fields, and provides philosophical analyses of how they interrelate.

This entry provides an overview of the topics and discussions in science and religion. Section 1 outlines the scope of both fields, and how they are related. Section 2 looks at the relationship between science and religion in five religious traditions, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Judaism. Section 3 discusses contemporary topics of scientific inquiry in which science and religion intersect, focusing on divine action, creation, and human origins.

1.1 A brief history

1.2 what is science, and what is religion, 1.3 taxonomies of the interaction between science and religion, 1.4 the scientific study of religion, 2.1 christianity, 2.3 hinduism, 2.4 buddhism, 2.5 judaism, 3.1 divine action and creation, 3.2 human origins, works cited, other important works, other internet resources, related entries, 1. science, religion, and how they interrelate.

Since the 1960s, scholars in theology, philosophy, history, and the sciences have studied the relationship between science and religion. Science and religion is a recognized field of study with dedicated journals (e.g., Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science ), academic chairs (e.g., the Andreas Idreos Professor of Science and Religion at Oxford University), scholarly societies (e.g., the Science and Religion Forum), and recurring conferences (e.g., the European Society for the Study of Science and Theology’s biennial meetings). Most of its authors are theologians (e.g., John Haught, Sarah Coakley), philosophers with an interest in science (e.g., Nancey Murphy), or (former) scientists with long-standing interests in religion, some of whom are also ordained clergy (e.g., the physicist John Polkinghorne, the molecular biophysicist Alister McGrath, and the atmospheric scientist Katharine Hayhoe). Recently, authors in science and religion also have degrees in that interdisciplinary field (e.g., Sarah Lane Ritchie).

The systematic study of science and religion started in the 1960s, with authors such as Ian Barbour (1966) and Thomas F. Torrance (1969) who challenged the prevailing view that science and religion were either at war or indifferent to each other. Barbour’s Issues in Science and Religion (1966) set out several enduring themes of the field, including a comparison of methodology and theory in both fields. Zygon, the first specialist journal on science and religion, was also founded in 1966. While the early study of science and religion focused on methodological issues, authors from the late 1980s to the 2000s developed contextual approaches, including detailed historical examinations of the relationship between science and religion (e.g., Brooke 1991). Peter Harrison (1998) challenged the warfare model by arguing that Protestant theological conceptions of nature and humanity helped to give rise to science in the seventeenth century. Peter Bowler (2001, 2009) drew attention to a broad movement of liberal Christians and evolutionists in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries who aimed to reconcile evolutionary theory with religious belief. In the 1990s, the Vatican Observatory (Castel Gandolfo, Italy) and the Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences (Berkeley, California) co-sponsored a series of conferences on divine action and how it can be understood in the light of various contemporary sciences. This resulted in six edited volumes (see Russell, Murphy, & Stoeger 2008 for a book-length summary of the findings of this project).

The field has presently diversified so much that contemporary discussions on religion and science tend to focus on specific disciplines and questions. Rather than ask if religion and science (broadly speaking) are compatible, productive questions focus on specific topics. For example, Buddhist modernists (see section 2.4 ) have argued that Buddhist theories about the self (the no-self) and Buddhist practices, such as mindfulness meditation, are compatible and are corroborated by neuroscience.

In the contemporary public sphere, a prominent interaction between science and religion concerns evolutionary theory and creationism/Intelligent Design. The legal battles (e.g., the Kitzmiller versus Dover trial in 2005) and lobbying surrounding the teaching of evolution and creationism in American schools suggest there’s a conflict between religion and science. However, even if one were to focus on the reception of evolutionary theory, the relationship between religion and science is complex. For instance, in the United Kingdom, scientists, clergy, and popular writers (the so-called Modernists), sought to reconcile science and religion during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, whereas the US saw the rise of a fundamentalist opposition to evolutionary thinking, exemplified by the Scopes trial in 1925 (Bowler 2001, 2009).

Another prominent offshoot of the discussion on science and religion is the New Atheist movement, with authors such as Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, and Christopher Hitchens. They argue that public life, including government, education, and policy should be guided by rational argument and scientific evidence, and that any form of supernaturalism (especially religion, but also, e.g., astrology) has no place in public life. They treat religious claims, such as the existence of God, as testable scientific hypotheses (see, e.g., Dawkins 2006).

In recent decades, the leaders of some Christian churches have issued conciliatory public statements on evolutionary theory. Pope John Paul II (1996) affirmed evolutionary theory in his message to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, but rejected it for the human soul, which he saw as the result of a separate, special creation. The Church of England publicly endorsed evolutionary theory (e.g., C. M. Brown 2008), including an apology to Charles Darwin for its initial rejection of his theory.

This entry will focus on the relationship between religious and scientific ideas as rather abstract philosophical positions, rather than as practices. However, this relationship has a large practical impact on the lives of religious people and scientists (including those who are both scientists and religious believers). A rich sociological literature indicates the complexity of these interactions, among others, how religious scientists conceive of this relationship (for recent reviews, see Ecklund 2010, 2021; Ecklund & Scheitle 2007; Gross & Simmons 2009).

For the past fifty years, the discussion on science and religion has de facto been on Western science and Christianity: to what extent can the findings of Western sciences be reconciled with Christian beliefs? The field of science and religion has only recently turned to an examination of non-Christian traditions, providing a richer picture of interaction.

In order to understand the scope of science and religion and their interactions, we must at least get a rough sense of what science and religion are. After all, “science” and “religion” are not eternally unchanging terms with unambiguous meanings. Indeed, they are terms that were coined recently, with meanings that vary across contexts. Before the nineteenth century, the term “religion” was rarely used. For a medieval author such as Aquinas, the term religio meant piety or worship, and was not applied to religious systems outside of what he considered orthodoxy (Harrison 2015). The term “religion” obtained its considerably broader current meaning through the works of early anthropologists, such as E.B. Tylor (1871), who systematically used the term for religions across the world. As a result, “religion” became a comparative concept, referring to traits that could be compared and scientifically studied, such as rituals, dietary restrictions, and belief systems (Jonathan Smith 1998).

The term “science” as it is currently used also became common in the nineteenth century. Prior to this, what we call “science” fell under the terminology of “natural philosophy” or, if the experimental part was emphasized, “experimental philosophy”. William Whewell (1834) standardized the term “scientist” to refer to practitioners of diverse natural philosophies. Philosophers of science have attempted to demarcate science from other knowledge-seeking endeavors, in particular religion. For instance, Karl Popper (1959) claimed that scientific hypotheses (unlike religious and philosophical ones) are in principle falsifiable. Many authors (e.g., Taylor 1996) affirm a disparity between science and religion, even if the meanings of both terms are historically contingent. They disagree, however, on how to precisely (and across times and cultures) demarcate the two domains.

One way to distinguish between science and religion is the claim that science concerns the natural world, whereas religion concerns the supernatural world and its relationship to the natural. Scientific explanations do not appeal to supernatural entities such as gods or angels (fallen or not), or to non-natural forces (such as miracles, karma, or qi ). For example, neuroscientists typically explain our thoughts in terms of brain states, not by reference to an immaterial soul or spirit, and legal scholars do not invoke karmic load when discussing why people commit crimes.

Naturalists draw a distinction between methodological naturalism , an epistemological principle that limits scientific inquiry to natural entities and laws, and ontological or philosophical naturalism , a metaphysical principle that rejects the supernatural (Forrest 2000). Since methodological naturalism is concerned with the practice of science (in particular, with the kinds of entities and processes that are invoked), it does not make any statements about whether or not supernatural entities exist. They might exist, but lie outside of the scope of scientific investigation. Some authors (e.g., Rosenberg 2014) hold that taking the results of science seriously entails negative answers to such persistent questions into the existence of free will or moral knowledge. However, these stronger conclusions are controversial.

The view that science can be demarcated from religion in its methodological naturalism is more commonly accepted. For instance, in the Kitzmiller versus Dover trial, the philosopher of science Robert Pennock was called to testify by the plaintiffs on whether Intelligent Design was a form of creationism, and therefore religion. If it were, the Dover school board policy would violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Building on earlier work (e.g., Pennock 1998), Pennock argued that Intelligent Design, in its appeal to supernatural mechanisms, was not methodologically naturalistic, and that methodological naturalism is an essential component of science.

Methodological naturalism is a recent development in the history of science, though we can see precursors of it in medieval authors such as Aquinas who attempted to draw a theological distinction between miracles, such as the working of relics, and unusual natural phenomena, such as magnetism and the tides (see Perry & Ritchie 2018). Natural and experimental philosophers such as Isaac Newton, Johannes Kepler, Robert Hooke, and Robert Boyle regularly appealed to supernatural agents in their natural philosophy (which we now call “science”). Still, overall there was a tendency to favor naturalistic explanations in natural philosophy. The X-club was a lobby group for the professionalization of science founded in 1864 by Thomas Huxley and friends. While the X-club may have been in part motivated by the desire to remove competition by amateur-clergymen scientists in the field of science, and thus to open up the field to full-time professionals, its explicit aim was to promote a science that would be free from religious dogma (Garwood 2008, Barton 2018). This preference for naturalistic causes may have been encouraged by past successes of naturalistic explanations, leading authors such as Paul Draper (2005) to argue that the success of methodological naturalism could be evidence for ontological naturalism.

Several typologies probe the interaction between science and religion. For example, Mikael Stenmark (2004) distinguishes between three views: the independence view (no overlap between science and religion), the contact view (some overlap between the fields), and a union of the domains of science and religion; within these views he recognizes further subdivisions, e.g., contact can be in the form of conflict or harmony. The most influential taxonomy of the relationship between science and religion remains Barbour’s (2000): conflict, independence, dialogue, and integration. Subsequent authors, as well as Barbour himself, have refined and amended this taxonomy. However, others (e.g., Cantor & Kenny 2001) have argued that this taxonomy is not useful to understand past interactions between both fields. Nevertheless, because of its enduring influence, it is still worthwhile to discuss it in detail.

The conflict model holds that science and religion are in perpetual and principal conflict. It relies heavily on two historical narratives: the trial of Galileo (see Dawes 2016) and the reception of Darwinism (see Bowler 2001). Contrary to common conception, the conflict model did not originate in two seminal publications, namely John Draper’s (1874) History of the Conflict between Religion and Science and Andrew Dickson White’s (1896) two-volume opus A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom . Rather, as James Ungureanu (2019) argues, the project of these early architects of the conflict thesis needs to be contextualized in a liberal Protestant tradition of attempting to separate religion from theology, and thus salvage religion. Their work was later appropriated by skeptics and atheists who used their arguments about the incompatibility of traditional theological views with science to argue for secularization, something Draper and White did not envisage.

The vast majority of authors in the science and religion field is critical of the conflict model and believes it is based on a shallow and partisan reading of the historical record. While the conflict model is at present a minority position, some have used philosophical argumentation (e.g., Philipse 2012) or have carefully re-examined historical evidence such as the Galileo trial (e.g., Dawes 2016) to argue for this model. Alvin Plantinga (2011) has argued that the conflict is not between science and religion, but between science and naturalism. In his Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (first formulated in 1993), Plantinga argues that naturalism is epistemically self-defeating: if both naturalism and evolution are true, then it’s unlikely we would have reliable cognitive faculties.

The independence model holds that science and religion explore separate domains that ask distinct questions. Stephen Jay Gould developed an influential independence model with his NOMA principle (“Non-Overlapping Magisteria”):

The lack of conflict between science and religion arises from a lack of overlap between their respective domains of professional expertise. (2001: 739)

He identified science’s areas of expertise as empirical questions about the constitution of the universe, and religion’s domain of expertise as ethical values and spiritual meaning. NOMA is both descriptive and normative: religious leaders should refrain from making factual claims about, for instance, evolutionary theory, just as scientists should not claim insight on moral matters. Gould held that there might be interactions at the borders of each magisterium, such as our responsibility toward other living things. One obvious problem with the independence model is that if religion were barred from making any statement of fact, it would be difficult to justify its claims of value and ethics. For example, one could not argue that one should love one’s neighbor because it pleases the creator (Worrall 2004). Moreover, religions do seem to make empirical claims, for example, that Jesus appeared after his death or that the early Hebrews passed through the parted waters of the Red Sea.

The dialogue model proposes a mutualistic relationship between religion and science. Unlike independence, it assumes a common ground between both fields, perhaps in their presuppositions, methods, and concepts. For example, the Christian doctrine of creation may have encouraged science by assuming that creation (being the product of a designer) is both intelligible and orderly, so one can expect there are laws that can be discovered. Creation, as a product of God’s free actions, is also contingent, so the laws of nature cannot be learned through a priori thinking which prompts the need for empirical investigation. According to Barbour (2000), both scientific and theological inquiry are theory-dependent, or at least model-dependent. For example, the doctrine of the Trinity colors how Christian theologians interpret the first chapters of Genesis. Next to this, both rely on metaphors and models. Both fields remain separate but they talk to each other, using common methods, concepts, and presuppositions. Wentzel van Huyssteen (1998) has argued for a dialogue position, proposing that science and religion can be in a graceful duet, based on their epistemological overlaps. The Partially Overlapping Magisteria (POMA) model defended by Alister McGrath (e.g., McGrath and Collicutt McGrath 2007) is also worth mentioning. According to McGrath, science and religion each draw on several different methodologies and approaches. These methods and approaches are different ways of knowing that have been shaped through historical factors. It is beneficial for scientists and theologians to be in dialogue with each other.

The integration model is more extensive in its unification of science and theology. Barbour (2000) identifies three forms of integration. First, natural theology, which formulates arguments for the existence and attributes of God. It uses interpretations of results from the natural sciences as premises in its arguments. For instance, the supposition that the universe has a temporal origin features in contemporary cosmological arguments for the existence of God. Likewise, the fact that the cosmological constants and laws of nature are life-permitting (whereas many other combinations of constants and laws would not permit life) is used in contemporary fine-tuning arguments (see the entry to fine-tuning arguments ). Second, theology of nature starts not from science but from a religious framework, and examines how this can enrich or even revise findings of the sciences. For example, McGrath (2016) developed a Christian theology of nature, examining how nature and scientific findings can be interpreted through a Christian lens. Thirdly, Barbour believed that Whitehead’s process philosophy was a promising way to integrate science and religion.

While integration seems attractive (especially to theologians), it is difficult to do justice to both the scientific and religious aspects of a given domain, especially given their complexities. For example, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1971), who was both knowledgeable in paleoanthropology and theology, ended up with an unconventional view of evolution as teleological (which put him at odds with the scientific establishment) and with an unorthodox theology (which denied original sin and led to a series of condemnations by the Roman Catholic Church). Theological heterodoxy, by itself, is no reason to doubt a model. However, it shows obstacles for the integration model to become a live option in the broader community of theologians and philosophers who want to remain affiliate to a specific religious community without transgressing its boundaries. Moreover, integration seems skewed towards theism: Barbour described arguments based on scientific results that support (but do not demonstrate) theism, but failed to discuss arguments based on scientific results that support (but do not demonstrate) the denial of theism. Hybrid positions like McGrath’s POMA indicate some difficulty for Barbour’s taxonomy: the scope of conflict, independence, dialogue, and integration is not clearly defined and they are not mutually exclusive. For example, if conflict is defined broadly then it is compatible with integration. Take the case of Frederick Tennant (1902), who sought to explain sin as the result of evolutionary pressures on human ancestors. This view led him to reject the Fall as a historical event, as it was not compatible with evolutionary biology. His view has conflict (as he saw Christian doctrine in conflict with evolutionary biology) but also integration (he sought to integrate the theological concept of sin in an evolutionary picture). It is clear that many positions defined by authors in the religion and science literature do not clearly fall within one of Barbour’s four domains.

Science and religion are closely interconnected in the scientific study of religion, which can be traced back to seventeenth-century natural histories of religion. Natural historians attempted to provide naturalistic explanations for human behavior and culture, including religion and morality. For example, Bernard Le Bovier de Fontenelle’s De l’Origine des Fables (1724) offered a causal account of belief in the supernatural. People often assert supernatural explanations when they lack an understanding of the natural causes underlying extraordinary events: “To the extent that one is more ignorant, or one has less experience, one sees more miracles” (1724 [1824: 295], my translation). Hume’s Natural History of Religion (1757) is perhaps the best-known philosophical example of a natural historical explanation of religious belief. It traces the origins of polytheism—which Hume thought was the earliest form of religious belief—to ignorance about natural causes combined with fear and apprehension about the environment. By deifying aspects of the environment, early humans tried to persuade or bribe the gods, thereby gaining a sense of control.

In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, authors from newly emerging scientific disciplines, such as anthropology, sociology, and psychology examined the purported naturalistic roots of religious beliefs. They did so with a broad brush, trying to explain what unifies diverse religious beliefs across cultures. Auguste Comte (1841) proposed that all societies, in their attempts to make sense of the world, go through the same stages of development: the theological (religious) stage is the earliest phase, where religious explanations predominate, followed by the metaphysical stage (a non-intervening God), and culminating in the positive or scientific stage, marked by scientific explanations and empirical observations.

In anthropology, this positivist idea influenced cultural evolutionism, a theoretical framework that sought to explain cultural change using universal patterns. The underlying supposition was that all cultures evolve and progress along the same trajectory. Cultures with differing religious views were explained as being in different stages of their development. For example, Tylor (1871) regarded animism as the earliest form of religious belief. James Frazer’s Golden Bough (1890) is somewhat unusual within this literature, as he saw commonalities between magic, religion, and science. Though he proposed a linear progression, he also argued that a proto-scientific mindset gave rise to magical practices, including the discovery of regularities in nature. Cultural evolutionist models dealt poorly with religious diversity and with the complex relationships between science and religion across cultures. Many authors proposed that religion was just a stage in human development, which would eventually be superseded. For example, social theorists such as Karl Marx and Max Weber proposed versions of the secularization thesis, the view that religion would decline in the face of modern technology, science, and culture.

Functionalism was another theoretical framework that sought to explain religion. Functionalists did not consider religion to be a stage in human cultural development that would eventually be overcome. They saw it as a set of social institutions that served important functions in the societies they were part of. For example, the sociologist Émile Durkheim (1912 [1915]) argued that religious beliefs are social glue that helps to keep societies together.

Sigmund Freud and other early psychologists aimed to explain religion as the result of cognitive dispositions. For example, Freud (1927) saw religious belief as an illusion, a childlike yearning for a fatherly figure. He also considered “oceanic feeling” (a feeling of limitlessness and of being connected with the world, a concept he derived from the French author Romain Rolland) as one of the origins of religious belief. He thought this feeling was a remnant of an infant’s experience of the self, prior to being weaned off the breast. William James (1902) was interested in the psychological roots and the phenomenology of religious experiences, which he believed were the ultimate source of all institutional religions.

From the 1920s onward, the scientific study of religion became less concerned with grand unifying narratives, and focused more on particular religious traditions and beliefs. Anthropologists such as Edward Evans-Pritchard (1937) and Bronisław Malinowski (1925) no longer relied exclusively on second-hand reports (usually of poor quality and from distorted sources), but engaged in serious fieldwork. Their ethnographies indicated that cultural evolutionism was a defective theoretical framework and that religious beliefs were more diverse than was previously assumed. They argued that religious beliefs were not the result of ignorance of naturalistic mechanisms. For instance, Evans-Pritchard (1937) noted that the Azande were well aware that houses could collapse because termites ate away at their foundations, but they still appealed to witchcraft to explain why a particular house collapsed at a particular time. More recently, Cristine Legare et al. (2012) found that people in various cultures straightforwardly combine supernatural and natural explanations, for instance, South Africans are aware AIDS is caused by the HIV virus, but some also believe that the viral infection is ultimately caused by a witch.

Psychologists and sociologists of religion also began to doubt that religious beliefs were rooted in irrationality, psychopathology, and other atypical psychological states, as James (1902) and other early psychologists had assumed. In the US, in the late 1930s through the 1960s, psychologists developed a renewed interest for religion, fueled by the observation that religion refused to decline and seemed to undergo a substantial revival, thus casting doubt on the secularization thesis (see Stark 1999 for an overview). Psychologists of religion have made increasingly fine-grained distinctions between types of religiosity, including extrinsic religiosity (being religious as means to an end, for instance, getting the benefits of being a member of a social group) and intrinsic religiosity (people who adhere to religions for the sake of their teachings) (Allport & Ross 1967). Psychologists and sociologists now commonly study religiosity as an independent variable, with an impact on, for instance, health, criminality, sexuality, socio-economic profile, and social networks.

A recent development in the scientific study of religion is the cognitive science of religion (CSR). This is a multidisciplinary field, with authors from, among others, developmental psychology, anthropology, philosophy, and cognitive psychology (see C. White 2021 for a comprehensive overview). It differs from other scientific approaches to religion in its presupposition that religion is not a purely cultural phenomenon. Rather, authors in CSR hold that religion is the result of ordinary, early developed, and universal human cognitive processes (e.g., Barrett 2004, Boyer 2002). Some authors regard religion as the byproduct of cognitive processes that are not evolved for religion. For example, according to Paul Bloom (2007), religion emerges as a byproduct of our intuitive distinction between minds and bodies: we can think of minds as continuing, even after the body dies (e.g., by attributing desires to a dead family member), which makes belief in an afterlife and in disembodied spirits natural and spontaneous. Another family of hypotheses regards religion as a biological or cultural adaptive response that helps humans solve cooperative problems (e.g., Bering 2011; Purzycki & Sosis 2022): through their belief in big, powerful gods that can punish, humans behave more cooperatively, which allowed human group sizes to expand beyond small hunter-gatherer communities. Groups with belief in big gods thus out-competed groups without such beliefs for resources during the Neolithic, which would explain the current success of belief in such gods (Norenzayan 2013). However, the question of which came first—big god beliefs or large-scale societies—is a continued matter of debate.

2. Science and religion in various religions

As noted, most studies on the relationship between science and religion have focused on science and Christianity, with only a small number of publications devoted to other religious traditions (e.g., Brooke & Numbers 2011; Lopez 2008). Since science makes universal claims, it is easy to assume that its encounter with other religious traditions would be similar to its interactions with Christianity. However, given different creedal tenets (e.g., in Hindu traditions God is usually not entirely distinct from creation, unlike in Christianity and Judaism), and because science has had distinct historical trajectories in other cultures, one can expect disanalogies in the relationship between science and religion in different religious traditions. To give a sense of this diversity, this section provides a bird’s eye view of science and religion in five major world religions: Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Judaism.

Christianity is an Abrahamic monotheistic religion, currently the religion with the most adherents. It developed in the first century CE out of Judaism. Christians adhere to asserted revelations described in a series of canonical texts, which include the Old Testament, which comprises texts inherited from Judaism, and the New Testament, which contains the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John (narratives on the life and teachings of Jesus), as well as events and teachings of the early Christian churches (e.g., Acts of the Apostles, letters by Paul), and Revelation, a prophetic book on the end times.

Given the prominence of revealed texts in Christianity, a useful starting point to examine the relationship between Christianity and science is the two books metaphor (see Tanzella-Nitti 2005 for an overview): God revealed Godself through the “Book of Nature”, with its orderly laws, and the “Book of Scripture”, with its historical narratives and accounts of miracles. Augustine (354–430) argued that the book of nature was the more accessible of the two, since scripture requires literacy whereas illiterates and literates alike could read the book of nature. Maximus Confessor (c. 580–662), in his Ambigua (see Louth 1996 for a collection of and critical introduction to these texts) compared scripture and natural law to two clothes that envelop the Incarnated Logos: Jesus’ humanity is revealed by nature, whereas his divinity is revealed by the scriptures. During the Middle Ages, authors such as Hugh of St. Victor (ca. 1096–1141) and Bonaventure (1221–1274) began to realize that the book of nature was not at all straightforward to read. Given that original sin marred our reason and perception, what conclusions could humans legitimately draw about ultimate reality? Bonaventure used the metaphor of the books to the extent that “ liber naturae ” was a synonym for creation, the natural world. He argued that sin has clouded human reason so much that the book of nature has become unreadable, and that scripture is needed as an aid as it contains teachings about the world.

Christian authors in the field of science and religion continue to debate how these two books interrelate. Concordism is the attempt to interpret scripture in the light of modern science. It is a hermeneutical approach to Bible interpretation, where one expects that the Bible foretells scientific theories, such as the Big Bang theory or evolutionary theory. However, as Denis Lamoureux (2008: chapter 5) argues, many scientific-sounding statements in the Bible are false: the mustard seed is not the smallest seed, male reproductive seeds do not contain miniature persons, there is no firmament, and the earth is neither flat nor immovable. Thus, any plausible form of integrating the book of nature and scripture will require more nuance and sophistication. Theologians such as John Wesley (1703–1791) have proposed the addition of other sources of knowledge to scripture and science: the Wesleyan quadrilateral (a term not coined by Wesley himself) is the dynamic interaction of scripture, experience (including the empirical findings of the sciences), tradition, and reason (Outler 1985).

Several Christian authors have attempted to integrate science and religion (e.g., Haught 1995, Lamoureux 2008, Murphy 1995), making integration a highly popular view on the relationship between science and religion. These authors tend to interpret findings from the sciences, such as evolutionary theory or chaos theory, in a theological light, using established theological models such as classical theism or the doctrine of creation. John Haught (1995) argues that the theological view of kenosis (self-emptying of God in creation) anticipates scientific findings such as evolutionary theory: a self-emptying God (i.e., who limits Godself), who creates a distinct and autonomous world, makes a world with internal self-coherence, with a self-organizing universe as the result.

The dominant epistemological outlook in Christian science and religion has been critical realism, a position that applies both to theology (theological realism) and to science (scientific realism). Barbour (1966) introduced this view into the science and religion literature; it has been further developed by theologians such as Arthur Peacocke (1984) and Wentzel van Huyssteen (1999). Critical realism aims to offer a middle way between naïve realism (the world is as we perceive it) and instrumentalism (our perceptions and concepts are purely instrumental). It encourages critical reflection on perception and the world, hence “critical”. Critical realism has distinct flavors in the works of different authors, for instance, van Huyssteen (1998, 1999) develops a weak form of critical realism set within a postfoundationalist notion of rationality, where theological views are shaped by social, cultural, and evolved biological factors. Murphy (1995: 329–330) outlines doctrinal and scientific requirements for approaches in science and religion: ideally, an integrated approach should be broadly in line with Christian doctrine, especially core tenets such as the doctrine of creation, while at the same time it should be in line with empirical observations without undercutting scientific practices.

Several historians (e.g., Hooykaas 1972) have argued that Christianity was instrumental to the development of Western science. Peter Harrison (2007) maintains that the doctrine of original sin played a crucial role in this, arguing there was a widespread belief in the early modern period that Adam, prior to the Fall, had superior senses, intellect, and understanding. As a result of the Fall, human senses became duller, our ability to make correct inferences was diminished, and nature itself became less intelligible. Postlapsarian humans (i.e., humans after the Fall) are no longer able to exclusively rely on their a priori reasoning to understand nature. They must supplement their reasoning and senses with observation through specialized instruments, such as microscopes and telescopes. As the experimental philosopher Robert Hooke wrote in the introduction to his Micrographia :

every man, both from a deriv’d corruption, innate and born with him, and from his breeding and converse with men, is very subject to slip into all sorts of errors … These being the dangers in the process of humane Reason, the remedies of them all can only proceed from the real, the mechanical, the experimental Philosophy [experiment-based science]. (1665, cited in Harrison 2007: 5)

Another theological development that may have facilitated the rise of science was the Condemnation of Paris (1277), which forbade teaching and reading natural philosophical views that were considered heretical, such as Aristotle’s physical treatises. As a result, the Condemnation opened up intellectual space to think beyond ancient Greek natural philosophy. For example, medieval philosophers such as John Buridan (fl. 14th c) held the Aristotelian belief that there could be no vacuum in nature, but once the idea of a vacuum became plausible, natural philosophers such as Evangelista Torricelli (1608–1647) and Blaise Pascal (1623–1662) could experiment with air pressure and vacua (see Grant 1996, for discussion).

Some authors claim that Christianity was unique and instrumental in catalyzing the scientific revolution. For example, according to the sociologist of religion Rodney Stark (2004), the scientific revolution was in fact a slow, gradual development from medieval Christian theology. Claims such as Stark’s, however, fail to recognize the legitimate contributions of Islamic and Greek scholars to the development of modern science, and fail to do justice to the importance of practical technological innovations in map-making and star-charting in the emergence of modern science. In spite of these positive readings of the relationship between science and religion in Christianity, there are sources of enduring tension. For example, there is still vocal opposition to the theory of evolution among Christian fundamentalists. In the public sphere, the conflict view between Christianity and science prevails, in stark contrast to the scholarly literature. This is due to an important extent to the outsize influence of a vocal conservative Christian minority in the American public debate, which sidelines more moderate voices (Evans 2016).

Islam is a monotheistic religion that emerged in the seventh century, following a series of purported revelations to the prophet Muḥammad. The term “Islam” also denotes geo-political structures, such as caliphates and empires, which were founded by Muslim rulers from the seventh century onward, including the Umayyad, Abbasid, and Ottoman caliphates. Additionally, it refers to a culture which flourished within this political and religious context, with its own philosophical and scientific traditions (Dhanani 2002). The defining characteristic of Islam is belief in one God (Allāh), who communicates through prophets, including Adam, Abraham, and Muḥammad. Allāh‎’s revelations to Muḥammad are recorded in the Qurʾān, the central religious text for Islam. Next to the Qurʾān, an important source of jurisprudence and theology is the ḥadīth, an oral corpus of attested sayings, actions, and tacit approvals of the prophet Muḥammad. The two major branches of Islam, Sunni and Shia, are based on a dispute over the succession of Muḥammad. As the second largest religion in the world, Islam shows a wide variety of beliefs. Core creedal views include the oneness of God ( tawḥīd ), the view that there is only one undivided God who created and sustains the universe, prophetic revelation (in particular to Muḥammad), and an afterlife. Beyond this, Muslims disagree on a number of doctrinal issues.

The relationship between Islam and science is complex. Today, predominantly Muslim countries, such as the United Arabic Emirates, enjoy high urbanization and technological development, but they still underperform in common metrics of scientific research, such as publications in leading journals and number of citations per scientist, compared to other regions outside of the west such as India and China (see Edis 2007). Some Muslims hold a number of pseudoscientific ideas, some of which it shares with Christianity such as Old Earth creationism, whereas others are specific to Islam such as the recreation of human bodies from the tailbone on the day of resurrection, and the superiority of prayer in treating lower-back pain instead of conventional methods (Guessoum 2011: 4–5).

This contemporary lack of scientific prominence is remarkable given that the Islamic world far exceeded European cultures in the range and quality of its scientific knowledge between approximately the ninth and the fifteenth century, excelling in domains such as mathematics (algebra and geometry, trigonometry in particular), astronomy (seriously considering, but not adopting, heliocentrism), optics, and medicine. These domains of knowledge are commonly referred to as “Arabic science”, to distinguish them from the pursuits of science that arose in the west (Huff 2003). “Arabic science” is an imperfect term, as many of the practitioners were not speakers of Arabic, hence the term “science in the Islamic world” is more accurate. Many scientists in the Islamic world were polymaths, for example, Ibn Sīnā (Avicenna, 980–1037) is commonly regarded as one of the most significant innovators, not only in philosophy, but also in medicine and astronomy. His Canon of Medicine , a medical encyclopedia, was a standard textbook in universities across Europe for many centuries after his death. Al-Fārābī (ca. 872–ca. 950), a political philosopher from Damascus, also investigated music theory, science, and mathematics. Omar Khayyám (1048–1131) achieved lasting fame in disparate domains such as poetry, astronomy, geography, and mineralogy. The Andalusian Ibn Rušd (Averroes, 1126–1198) wrote on medicine, physics, astronomy, psychology, jurisprudence, music, and geography, next to developing a Greek-inspired philosophical theology.

A major impetus for science in the Islamic world was the patronage of the Abbasid caliphate (758–1258), centered in Baghdad. Early Abbasid rulers, such as Harun al-Rashid (ruled 786–809) and his successor Abū Jaʿfar Abdullāh al-Ma’mūn (ruled 813–833), were significant patrons of science. The former founded the Bayt al-Hikma (House of Wisdom), which commissioned translations of major works by Aristotle, Galen, and many Persian and Indian scholars into Arabic. It was cosmopolitan in its outlook, employing astronomers, mathematicians, and physicians from abroad, including Indian mathematicians and Nestorian (Christian) astronomers. Throughout the Islamic world, public libraries attached to mosques provided access to a vast compendium of knowledge, which spread Islam, Greek philosophy, and science. The use of a common language (Arabic), as well as common religious and political institutions and flourishing trade relations encouraged the spread of scientific ideas throughout the Islamic world. Some of this transmission was informal, e.g., correspondence between like-minded people (see Dhanani 2002), some formal, e.g., in hospitals where students learned about medicine in a practical, master-apprentice setting, and in astronomical observatories and academies. The decline and fall of the Abbasid caliphate dealt a blow to science in the Islamic world, but it remains unclear why it ultimately stagnated, and why it did not experience something analogous to the scientific revolution in Western Europe. Note, the decline of science in the Islamic world should not be generalized to other fields, such as philosophy and philosophical theology, which continued to flourish after the Abbasid caliphate fell.

Some liberal Muslim authors, such as Fatima Mernissi (1992), argue that the rise of conservative forms of Islamic philosophical theology stifled more scientifically-minded natural philosophy. In the ninth to the twelfth century, the Mu’tazila (a philosophical theological school) helped the growth of science in the Islamic world thanks to their embrace of Greek natural philosophy. But eventually, the Mu’tazila and their intellectual descendants lost their influence to more conservative brands of theology. Al-Ghazālī’s influential eleventh-century work, The Incoherence of the Philosophers ( Tahāfut al-falāsifa ), was a scathing and sophisticated critique of Greek-inspired Muslim philosophy, arguing that their metaphysical assumptions could not be demonstrated. This book vindicated more orthodox Muslim religious views. As Muslim intellectual life became more orthodox, it became less open to non-Muslim philosophical ideas, which led to the decline of science in the Islamic world, according to this view.

The problem with this narrative is that orthodox worries about non-Islamic knowledge were already present before Al-Ghazālī and continued long after his death (Edis 2007: chapter 2). The study of law ( fiqh ) was more stifling for science in the Islamic world than developments in theology. The eleventh century saw changes in Islamic law that discouraged heterodox thought: lack of orthodoxy could now be regarded as apostasy from Islam ( zandaqa ) which is punishable by death, whereas before, a Muslim could only apostatize by an explicit declaration (Griffel 2009: 105). (Al-Ghazālī himself only regarded the violation of three core doctrines as zandaqa , namely statements that challenged monotheism, the prophecy of Muḥammad, and resurrection after death.) Given that heterodox thoughts could be interpreted as apostasy, this created a stifling climate for science. In the second half of the nineteenth century, as science and technology became firmly entrenched in Western society, Muslim empires were languishing or colonized. Scientific ideas, such as evolutionary theory, became equated with European colonialism, and thus met with distrust. The enduring association between western culture, colonialism, and science led to a more prominent conflict view of the relationship between science and religion in Muslim countries.

In spite of this negative association between science and Western modernity, there is an emerging literature on science and religion by Muslim scholars (mostly scientists). The physicist Nidhal Guessoum (2011) holds that science and religion are not only compatible, but in harmony. He rejects the idea of treating the Qurʾān as a scientific encyclopedia, something other Muslim authors in the debate on science and religion tend to do. Moreover, he adheres to the no-possible-conflict principle, outlined by Ibn Rušd: there can be no conflict between God’s word (properly understood) and God’s work (properly understood). If an apparent conflict arises, the Qurʾān may not have been interpreted correctly.

While the Qurʾān asserts a creation in six days (like the Hebrew Bible), “day” is often interpreted as a very long span of time, rather than a 24-hour period. As a result, Old Earth creationism is more influential in Islam than Young Earth creationism. Adnan Oktar’s Atlas of Creation (published in 2007 under the pseudonym Harun Yahya), a glossy coffee table book that draws heavily on Christian Old Earth creationism, has been distributed worldwide (Hameed 2008). Since the Qurʾān explicitly mentions the special creation of Adam out of clay, most Muslims refuse to accept that humans evolved from hominin ancestors. Nevertheless, Muslim scientists such as Guessoum (2011) and Rana Dajani (2015) have advocated acceptance of evolution.

Hinduism is the world’s third largest religion, though the term “Hinduism” is an awkward catch-all phrase that denotes diverse religious and philosophical traditions that emerged on the Indian subcontinent between 500 BCE and 300 CE. The vast majority of Hindus live in India; most others live in Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Southeast Asia, with a significant diaspora in western countries such as the United States (Hackett 2015 [ Other Internet Resources ]). In contrast to the Abrahamic monotheistic religions, Hinduism does not always draw a sharp distinction between God and creation. (While there are pantheistic and panentheistic views in Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, these are minority positions.) Many Hindus believe in a personal God, and identify this God as immanent in creation. This view has ramifications for the science and religion debate, in that there is no sharp ontological distinction between creator and creature (Subbarayappa 2011). Religious traditions originating on the Indian subcontinent, including Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, and Sikhism, are referred to as dharmic religions. Philosophical points of view are referred to as darśana .

One factor that unites the different strands of Hinduism is the importance of foundational texts composed between ca. 1600 and 700 BCE. These include the Vedas, which contain hymns and prescriptions for performing rituals, Brāhmaṇa, accompanying liturgical texts, and Upaniṣad, metaphysical treatises. The Vedas discuss gods who personify and embody natural phenomena such as fire (Agni) and wind (Vāyu). More gods appear in the following centuries (e.g., Gaṇeśa and Sati-Parvati in the 4th century). Note that there are both polytheistic and monotheistic strands in Hinduism, so it is not the case that individual believers worship or recognize all of these gods. Ancient Vedic rituals encouraged knowledge of diverse sciences, including astronomy, linguistics, and mathematics. Astronomical knowledge was required to determine the timing of rituals and the construction of sacrificial altars. Linguistics developed out of a need to formalize grammatical rules for classical Sanskrit, which was used in rituals. Large public offerings also required the construction of elaborate altars, which posed geometrical problems and thus led to advances in geometry. Classic Vedic texts also frequently used very large numbers, for instance, to denote the age of humanity and the Earth, which required a system to represent numbers parsimoniously, giving rise to a 10-base positional system and a symbolic representation for zero as a placeholder, which would later be imported in other mathematical traditions (Joseph 1991 [2000]). In this way, ancient Indian dharma encouraged the emergence of the sciences.

Around the sixth–fifth century BCE, the northern part of the Indian subcontinent experienced an extensive urbanization. In this context, medicine ( āyurveda ) became standardized. This period also gave rise to a wide range of heterodox philosophical schools, including Buddhism, Jainism, and Cārvāka. The latter defended a form of metaphysical naturalism, denying the existence of gods or karma. The relationship between science and religion on the Indian subcontinent is complex, in part because the dharmic religions and philosophical schools are so diverse. For example, Cārvāka proponents had a strong suspicion of inferential beliefs, and rejected Vedic revelation and supernaturalism in general, instead favoring direct observation as a source of knowledge.

Natural theology also flourished in the pre-colonial period, especially in the Advaita Vedānta, a darśana that identifies the self, ātman , with ultimate reality, Brahman. Advaita Vedāntin philosopher Adi Śaṅkara (fl. first half eighth century) was an author who regarded Brahman as the only reality, both the material and the efficient cause of the cosmos. Śaṅkara formulated design and cosmological arguments, drawing on analogies between the world and artifacts: in ordinary life, we never see non-intelligent agents produce purposive design, yet the universe is suitable for human life, just like benches and pleasure gardens are designed for us. Given that the universe is so complex that even an intelligent craftsman cannot comprehend it, how could it have been created by non-intelligent natural forces? Śaṅkara concluded that it must have been designed by an intelligent creator (C.M. Brown 2008: 108).

From 1757 to 1947, India was under British colonial rule. This had a profound influence on its culture as Hindus came into contact with Western science and technology. For local intellectuals, the contact with Western science presented a challenge: how to assimilate these ideas with Hinduism? Mahendrahal Sircar (1833–1904) was one of the first authors to examine evolutionary theory and its implications for Hindu religious beliefs. Sircar was an evolutionary theist, who believed that God used evolution to create current life forms. Evolutionary theism was not a new hypothesis in Hinduism, but the many lines of empirical evidence Darwin provided for evolution gave it a fresh impetus. While Sircar accepted organic evolution through common descent, he questioned the mechanism of natural selection as it was not teleological, which went against his evolutionary theism. This was a widespread problem for the acceptance of evolutionary theory, one that Christian evolutionary theists also wrestled with (Bowler 2009). He also argued against the British colonists’ beliefs that Hindus were incapable of scientific thought, and encouraged fellow Hindus to engage in science, which he hoped would help regenerate the Indian nation (C.M. Brown 2012: chapter 6).

The assimilation of Western culture prompted various revivalist movements that sought to reaffirm the cultural value of Hinduism. They put forward the idea of a Vedic science, where all scientific findings are already prefigured in the Vedas and other ancient texts (e.g., Vivekananda 1904). This idea is still popular within contemporary Hinduism, and is quite similar to ideas held by contemporary Muslims, who refer to the Qurʾān as a harbinger of scientific theories.

Responses to evolutionary theory were as diverse as Christian views on this subject, ranging from creationism (denial of evolutionary theory based on a perceived incompatibility with Vedic texts) to acceptance (see C.M. Brown 2012 for a thorough overview). Authors such as Dayananda Saraswati (1930–2015) rejected evolutionary theory. By contrast, Vivekananda (1863–1902), a proponent of the monistic Advaita Vedānta enthusiastically endorsed evolutionary theory and argued that it is already prefigured in ancient Vedic texts. His integrative view claimed that Hinduism and science are in harmony: Hinduism is scientific in spirit, as is evident from its long history of scientific discovery (Vivekananda 1904). Sri Aurobindo Ghose, a yogi and Indian nationalist who was educated in the West, formulated a synthesis of evolutionary thought and Hinduism. He interpreted the classic avatara doctrine, according to which God incarnates into the world repeatedly throughout time, in evolutionary terms. God thus appears first as an animal, later as a dwarf, then as a violent man (Rama), and then as Buddha, and as Kṛṣṇa. He proposed a metaphysical picture where both spiritual evolution (reincarnation and avatars) and physical evolution are ultimately a manifestation of God (Brahman). This view of reality as consisting of matter ( prakṛti ) and consciousness ( puruṣa ) goes back to sāṃkhya , one of the orthodox Hindu darśana, but Aurobindo made explicit reference to the divine, calling the process during which the supreme Consciousness dwells in matter involution (Aurobindo, 1914–18 [2005], see C.M. Brown 2007 for discussion).

During the twentieth century, Indian scientists began to gain prominence, including C.V. Raman (1888–1970), a Nobel Prize winner in physics, and Satyendra Nath Bose (1894–1974), a theoretical physicist who described the behavior of photons statistically, and who gave his name to bosons. However, these authors were silent on the relationship between their scientific work and their religious beliefs. By contrast, the mathematician Srinivasa Ramanujan (1887–1920) was open about his religious beliefs and their influence on his mathematical work. He claimed that the goddess Namagiri helped him to intuit solutions to mathematical problems. Likewise, Jagadish Chandra Bose (1858–1937), a theoretical physicist, biologist, biophysicist, botanist, and archaeologist who worked on radio waves, saw the Hindu idea of unity reflected in the study of nature. He started the Bose institute in Kolkata in 1917, the earliest interdisciplinary scientific institute in India (Subbarayappa 2011).

Buddhism, like the other religious traditions surveyed in this entry, encompasses many views and practices. The principal forms of Buddhism that exist today are Theravāda and Mahāyāna. (Vajrayāna, the tantric tradition of Buddhism, is also sometimes seen as a distinct form.) Theravāda is the dominant form of Buddhism of Sri Lanka and Southeast Asia. It traditionally refers to monastic and textual lineages associated with the study of the Pāli Buddhist Canon. Mahāyāna refers to a movement that likely began roughly four centuries after the Buddha’s death; it became the dominant form of Buddhism in East and Central Asia. It includes Chan or Zen, and also tantric Buddhism, which today is found mostly in Tibet, though East Asian forms also exist.

Buddhism originated in the historical figure of the Buddha (historically, Gautama Buddha or Siddhārtha Gautama, ca. 5 th –4 th century BCE). His teaching centered on ethics as well as metaphysics, incapsulated in the Four Noble Truths (on suffering and its origin in human desires), and the Noble Eightfold Path (right view, right aspiration, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration) to end suffering and to break the cycle of rebirths, culminating in reaching Nirvana. Substantive metaphysical teachings include belief in karma, the no-self, and the cycle of rebirth.

As a response to colonialist attitudes, modern Buddhists since the nineteenth century have often presented Buddhism as harmonious with science (Lopez 2008). The argument is roughly that since Buddhism doesn’t require belief in metaphysically substantive entities such as God, the soul, or the self (unlike, for example, Christianity), Buddhism should be easily compatible with the factual claims that scientists make. (Note, however, that historically most Buddhist have believed in various forms of divine abode and divinities.) We could thus expect the dialogue and integration view to prevail in Buddhism. An exemplar for integration is the fourteenth Dalai Lama, who is known for his numerous efforts to lead dialogue between religious people and scientists. He has extensively written on the relationship between Buddhism and various scientific disciplines such as neuroscience and cosmology (e.g., Dalai Lama 2005, see also the Science and Philosophy in the Indian Buddhist Classics series, a four-volume series conceived and compiled by the Dalai Lama, e.g., Jinpa 2017). Donald Lopez Jr (2008) identifies compatibility as an enduring claim in the debate on science and Buddhism, in spite of the fact that what is meant by these concepts has shifted markedly over time. As David McMahan (2009) argues, Buddhism underwent profound shifts in response to modernity in the west as well as globally. In this modern context, Buddhists have often asserted the compatibility of Buddhism with science, favorably contrasting their religion to Christianity in that respect.

The full picture of the relationship between Buddhism and religion is more nuanced than one of wholesale acceptance of scientific claims. I will here focus on East Asia, primarily Japan and China, and the reception of evolutionary theory in the early twentieth century to give a sense of this more complex picture. The earliest translations of evolutionary thought in Japan and China were not drawn from Darwin’s Origin of Species or Descent of Man , but from works by authors who worked in Darwin’s wake, such as Ernst Haeckel and Thomas Huxley. For example, the earliest translated writings on evolutionary theory in China was a compilation by Yan Fu entitled On Natural Evolution ( Tianyan lun ), which incorporated excerpts by Herbert Spencer and Thomas Huxley. This work drew a close distinction between social Darwinism and biological evolution (Ritzinger 2013). Chinese and Japanese Buddhists received these ideas in the context of western colonialism and imperialism. East Asian intellectuals saw how western colonial powers competed with each other for influence on their territory, and discerned parallels between this and the Darwinian struggle for existence. As a result, some intellectuals such as the Japanese political adviser and academic Katō Hiroyuki (1836–1916) drew on Darwinian thought and popularized notions such as “survival of the fittest” to justify the foreign policies of the Meiji government (Burenina 2020). It is in this context that we can situate Buddhist responses to evolutionary theory.

Buddhists do not distinguish between human beings as possessing a soul and other animals as soulless. As we are all part of the cycle of rebirth, we have all been in previous lives various other beings, including birds, insects, and fish. The problem of the specificity of the human soul does not even arise because of the no-self doctrine. Nevertheless, as Justin Ritzinger (2013) points out, Chinese Buddhists in the 1920s and 1930s who were confronted with early evolutionary theory did not accept Darwin’s theory wholesale. In their view, the central element of Darwinism—the struggle for existence—was incompatible with Buddhism, with its emphasis on compassion with other creatures. They rejected social Darwinism (which sought to engineer societies along Darwinian principles) because it was incompatible with Buddhist ethics and metaphysics. Struggling to survive and to propagate was clinging onto worldly things. Taixu (1890–1947), a Chinese Reformer and Buddhist modernist, instead chose to appropriate Pyotr Kropotkin’s evolutionary views, specifically on mutual aid and altruism. The Russian anarchist argued that cooperation was central to evolutionary change, a view that is currently also more mainstream. However, Kropotkin’s view did not go far enough in Taixu’s opinion because mutual aid still requires a self. Only when one recognizes the no-self doctrine could one dedicate oneself entirely to helping others, as bodhisattvas do (Ritzinger 2013).

Similar dynamics can be seen in the reception of evolutionary theory among Japanese Buddhists. Evolutionary theory was introduced in Japan during the early Meji period (1868–1912) when Japan opened itself to foreign trade and ideas. Foreign experts, such as the American zoologist Edward S. Morse (1838–1925) shared their knowledge of the sciences with Japanese scholars. The latter were interested in the social ramifications of Darwinism, particularly because they had access to translated versions of Spencer’s and Huxley’s work before they could read Darwin’s. Japanese Buddhists of the Nichiren tradition accepted many elements of evolutionary theory, but they rejected other elements, notably the struggle for existence, and randomness and chance, as this contradicts the role of karma in one’s circumstances at birth.

Among the advocates of the modern Nishiren Buddhist movement is Honda Nisshō (1867–1931). Honda emphasized the importance of retrogressions (in addition to progress, which was the main element in evolution that western authors such as Haeckel and Spencer considered). He strongly argued against social Darwinism, the application of evolutionary principles in social engineering, on religious grounds. He argued that we can accept humans are descended from apes without having to posit a pessimistic view of human nature that sees us as engaged in a struggle for survival with fellow human beings. Like Chinese Buddhists, Honda thought Kropotkin’s thesis of mutual aid was more compatible with Buddhism, but he was suspicious of Kropotkin’s anarchism (Burenina 2020). His work, like that of other East Asian Buddhists indicates that historically, Buddhists are not passive recipients of western science but creative interpreters. In some cases, their religious reasons for rejecting some metaphysical assumptions in evolutionary theory led them to anticipate recent developments in biology, such as the recognition of cooperation as an evolutionary principle.

Judaism is one of the three major Abrahamic monotheistic traditions, encompassing a range of beliefs and practices that express a covenant between God and the people of Israel. Central to both Jewish practice and beliefs is the study of texts, including the written Torah (the Tanakh, sometimes called “Hebrew Bible”), and the “Oral Law” of Rabbinic Judaism, compiled in such works like the Talmud. There is also a corpus of esoteric, mystical interpretations of biblical texts, the Kabbalah, which has influenced Jewish works on the relationship between science and religion. The Kabbalah also had an influence on Renaissance and early modern Christian authors such as Pico Della Mirandola, whose work helped to shape the scientific revolution (see the entry on Giovanni Pico della Mirandola ). The theologian Maimonides (Rabbi Moshe ben-Maimon, 1138–1204, aka Rambam) had an enduring influence on Jewish thought up until today, also in the science and religion literature.

Most contemporary strains of Judaism are Rabbinic, rather than biblical, and this has profound implications for the relationship between religion and science. While both Jews and Evangelical Christians emphasize the reading of sacred texts, the Rabbinic traditions (unlike, for example, the Evangelical Christian tradition) holds that reading and interpreting texts is far from straightforward. Scripture should not be read in a simple literal fashion. This opens up more space for accepting scientific theories (e.g., Big Bang cosmology) that seem at odds with a simple literal reading of the Torah (e.g., the six-day creation in Genesis) (Mitelman 2011 [ Other Internet Resources ]). Moreover, most non-Orthodox Jews in the US identify as politically liberal, so openness to science may also be an identity marker given that politically liberal people in the US have positive attitudes toward science (Pew Forum, 2021 [ Other Internet Resources ]).

Jewish thinkers have made substantive theoretical contributions to the relationship between science and religion, which differ in interesting respects from those seen in the literature written by Christian authors. To give just a few examples, Hermann Cohen (1842–1918), a prominent neo-Kantian German Jewish philosopher, thought of the relationship between Judaism and science in the light of the advances in scientific disciplines and the increased participation of Jewish scholars in the sciences. He argued that science, ethics, and Judaism should all be conceived of as distinct but complementary sciences. Cohen believed that his Jewish religious community was facing an epistemic crisis. All references to God had become suspect due to an adherence to naturalism, at first epistemological, but fast becoming ontological. Cohen saw the concept of a transcendent God as foundational to both Jewish practice and belief, so he thought adherence to wholesale naturalism threatened both Jewish orthodoxy and orthopraxy. As Teri Merrick (2020) argues, Cohen suspected this was in part due to epistemic oppression and self-censuring (though Cohen did not frame it in these terms). Because Jewish scientists wanted to retain credibility in the Christian majority culture, they underplayed and neglected the rich Jewish intellectual legacy in their practice. In response to this intellectual crisis, Cohen proposed to reframe Jewish thought and philosophy so that it would be recognized as both continuous with the tradition and essentially contributing to ethical and scientific advances. In this way, he reframed this tradition, articulating a broadly Kantian philosophy of science to combat a perceived conflict between Judaism and science (see the entry on Hermann Cohen for an in-depth discussion).

Jewish religious scholars have examined how science might influence religious beliefs, and vice versa. Rather than a unified response we see a spectrum of philosophical views, especially since the nineteenth and early twentieth century. As Shai Cherry (2003) surveys, Jewish scholars in the early twentieth century accepted biological evolution but were hesitant about Darwinian natural selection as the mechanism. The Latvian-born Israeli rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook (1865–1935) thought that religion and science are largely separate domains (a view somewhat similar to Gould’s NOMA), though he believed that there was a possible flow from religion to science. For example, Kook challenged the lack of directionality in Darwinian evolutionary theory. Using readings of the Kabbalah (and Halakhah, Jewish law), he proposed that biological evolution fits in a larger picture of cosmic evolution towards perfection.

By contrast, the American rabbi Morcedai Kaplan (1881–1983) thought information flow between science and religion could go in both directions, a view reminiscent to Barbour’s dialogue position. He repeatedly argued against scientism (the encroachment of science on too many aspects of human life, including ethics and religion), but he believed nevertheless we ought to apply scientific methods to religion. He saw reality as an unfolding process without a pre-ordained goal: it was progressive, but not teleologically determined. Kaplan emphasized the importance of morality (and identified God as the source of this process), and conceptualized humanity as not merely a passive recipient of evolutionary change, but an active participant, prefiguring work in evolutionary biology on the importance of agency in evolution (e.g., Okasha 2018). Thus, Kaplan’s reception of scientific theories, especially evolution, led him to formulate an early Jewish process theology.

Reform Judaism endorses an explicit anti-conflict view on the relationship between science and religion. For example, the Pittsburgh Platform of 1885, the first document of the Reform rabbinate, has a statement that explicitly says that science and Judaism are not in conflict:

We hold that the modern discoveries of scientific researches in the domain of nature and history are not antagonistic to the doctrines of Judaism.

This Platform had an enduring influence on Reform Judaism over the next decades. Secular Jewish scientists such as Albert Einstein, Richard Feynman, Douglas Daniel Kahneman, and Stephen J. Gould have also reflected on the relationship between science and broader issues of existential significance, and have exerted considerable influence on the science and religion debate.

3. Central topics in the debate

Current work in the field of science and religion encompasses a wealth of topics, including free will, ethics, human nature, and consciousness. Contemporary natural theologians discuss fine-tuning, in particular design arguments based on it (e.g., R. Collins 2009), the interpretation of multiverse cosmology, and the significance of the Big Bang (see entries on fine-tuning arguments and natural theology and natural religion ). For instance, authors such as Hud Hudson (2013) have explored the idea that God has actualized the best of all possible multiverses. Here follows an overview of two topics that continue to generate substantial interest and debate: divine action (and the closely related topic of creation) and human origins. The focus will be on Christian work in science and religion, due to its prevalence in the literature.

Before scientists developed their views on cosmology and origins of the world, Western cultures already had a doctrine of creation, based on biblical texts (e.g., the first three chapters of Genesis and the book of Revelation) and the writings of church fathers such as Augustine. This doctrine of creation has the following interrelated features: first, God created the world ex nihilo, i.e., out of nothing. Differently put, God did not need any pre-existing materials to make the world, unlike, e.g., the Demiurge (from Greek philosophy), who created the world from chaotic, pre-existing matter. Second, God is distinct from the world; the world is not equal to or part of God (contra pantheism or panentheism) or a (necessary) emanation of God’s being (contra Neoplatonism). Rather, God created the world freely. This introduces an asymmetry between creator and creature: the world is radically contingent upon God’s creative act and is also sustained by God, whereas God does not need creation (Jaeger 2012b: 3). Third, the doctrine of creation holds that creation is essentially good (this is repeatedly affirmed in Genesis 1). The world does contain evil, but God does not directly cause this evil to exist. Moreover, God does not merely passively sustain creation, but rather plays an active role in it, using special divine actions (e.g., miracles and revelations) to care for creatures. Fourth, God made provisions for the end of the world, and will create a new heaven and earth, in this way eradicating evil.

Views on divine action are related to the doctrine of creation. Theologians commonly draw a distinction between general and special divine action, but within the field of science and religion there is no universally accepted definition of these two concepts. One way to distinguish them (Wildman 2008: 140) is to regard general divine action as the creation and sustenance of reality, and special divine action as the collection of specific providential acts, such as miracles and revelations to prophets. Drawing this distinction allows for creatures to be autonomous and indicates that God does not micromanage every detail of creation. Still, the distinction is not always clear-cut, as some phenomena are difficult to classify as either general or special divine action. For example, the Roman Catholic Eucharist (in which bread and wine become the body and blood of Jesus) or some healing miracles outside of scripture seem mundane enough to be part of general housekeeping (general divine action), but still seem to involve some form of special intervention on God’s part. Alston (1989) makes a related distinction between direct and indirect divine acts. God brings about direct acts without the use of natural causes, whereas indirect acts are achieved through natural causes. Using this distinction, there are four possible kinds of actions that God could do: God could not act in the world at all, God could act only directly, God could act only indirectly, or God could act both directly and indirectly.

In the science and religion literature, there are two central questions on creation and divine action. To what extent are the Christian doctrine of creation and traditional views of divine action compatible with science? How can these concepts be understood within a scientific context, e.g., what does it mean for God to create and act? Note that the doctrine of creation says nothing about the age of the Earth, nor does it specify a mode of creation. This allows for a wide range of possible views within science and religion, of which Young Earth creationism is but one that is consistent with scripture. Indeed, some scientific theories, such as the Big Bang theory, first proposed by the Belgian Roman Catholic priest and astronomer Georges Lemaître (1927), look congenial to the doctrine of creation. The theory is not in contradiction, and could be integrated into creatio ex nihilo as it specifies that the universe originated from an extremely hot and dense state around 13.8 billion years ago (Craig 2003), although some philosophers have argued against the interpretation that the universe has a temporal beginning (e.g., Pitts 2008).

The net result of scientific findings since the seventeenth century has been that God was increasingly pushed into the margins. This encroachment of science on the territory of religion happened in two ways: first, scientific findings—in particular from geology and evolutionary theory—challenged and replaced biblical accounts of creation. Although the doctrine of creation does not contain details of the mode and timing of creation, the Bible was regarded as authoritative, and that authority got eroded by the sciences. Second, the emerging concept of scientific laws in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century physics seemed to leave no room for special divine action. These two challenges will be discussed below, along with proposed solutions in the contemporary science and religion literature.

Christian authors have traditionally used the Bible as a source of historical information. Biblical exegesis of the creation narratives, especially Genesis 1 and 2 (and some other scattered passages, such as in the Book of Job), remains fraught with difficulties. Are these texts to be interpreted in a historical, metaphorical, or poetic fashion, and what are we to make of the fact that the order of creation differs between these accounts (Harris 2013)? The Anglican archbishop James Ussher (1581–1656) used the Bible to date the beginning of creation at 4004 BCE. Although such literalist interpretations of the biblical creation narratives were not uncommon, and are still used by Young Earth creationists today, theologians before Ussher already offered alternative, non-literalist readings of the biblical materials (e.g., Augustine De Genesi ad litteram , 416). From the seventeenth century onward, the Christian doctrine of creation came under pressure from geology, with findings suggesting that the Earth was significantly older than 4004 BCE. From the eighteenth century on, natural philosophers, such as Benoît de Maillet, Lamarck, Chambers, and Darwin, proposed transmutationist (what would now be called evolutionary) theories, which seem incompatible with scriptural interpretations of the special creation of species. Following the publication of Darwin’s Origin of Species (1859), there has been an ongoing discussion on how to reinterpret the doctrine of creation in the light of evolutionary theory (see Bowler 2009 for an overview).

Ted Peters and Martinez Hewlett (2003) have outlined a divine action spectrum to clarify the distinct positions about creation and divine action in the contemporary science and religion literature that focuses on Christians, agnostics, and atheists. They discern two dimensions in this spectrum: the degree of divine action in the natural world, and the form of causal explanations that relate divine action to natural processes. At one extreme are creationists. Like other theists, they believe God has created the world and its fundamental laws, and that God occasionally performs special divine actions (miracles) that intervene in the fabric of those laws. Creationists deny any role of natural selection in the origin of species. Within creationism, there are Old and Young Earth creationism, with the former accepting geology and rejecting evolutionary biology, and the latter rejecting both. Next to creationism is Intelligent Design, which affirms divine intervention in natural processes. Intelligent Design creationists (e.g., Dembski 1998) believe there is evidence of intelligent design in organisms’ irreducible complexity; on the basis of this they infer design and purposiveness (see Kojonen 2016). Like other creationists, they deny a significant role for natural selection in shaping organic complexity and they affirm an interventionist account of divine action. For political reasons they do not label their intelligent designer as God, as they hope to circumvent the constitutional separation of church and state in the US which prohibits teaching religious doctrines in public schools (Forrest & Gross 2004). Theistic evolutionists hold a non-interventionist approach to divine action: God creates indirectly, through the laws of nature (e.g., through natural selection). For example, the theologian John Haught (2000) regards divine providence as self-giving love, and natural selection and other natural processes as manifestations of this love, as they foster creaturely autonomy and independence. While theistic evolutionists allow for special divine action, particularly the miracle of the Incarnation in Christ (e.g., Deane-Drummond 2009), deists such as Michael Corey (1994) think there is only general divine action: God has laid out the laws of nature and lets it run like clockwork without further interference. Deism is still a long distance from ontological materialism, the view that the material world is all there is. Ontological materialists tend to hold that the universe is intelligible, with laws that scientists can discover, but there is no lawgiver and no creator.

Views on divine action were influenced by developments in physics and their philosophical interpretation. In the seventeenth century, natural philosophers, such as Robert Boyle and John Wilkins, developed a mechanistic view of the world as governed by orderly and lawlike processes. Laws, understood as immutable and stable, created difficulties for the concept of special divine action (Pannenberg 2002). How could God act in a world that was determined by laws?

One way to regard miracles and other forms of special divine action is to see them as actions that somehow suspend or ignore the laws of nature. David Hume (1748: 181), for instance, defined a miracle as “a transgression of a law of nature by a particular volition of the deity, or by the interposal of some invisible agent”, and, more recently, Richard Swinburne (1968: 320) defines a miracle as “a violation of a law of Nature by a god”. This concept of divine action is commonly labeled interventionist. Interventionism regards the world as causally deterministic, so God has to create room for special divine actions. By contrast, non-interventionist forms of divine action require a world that is, at some level, non-deterministic, so that God can act without having to suspend or ignore the laws of nature.

In the seventeenth century, the explanation of the workings of nature in terms of elegant physical laws suggested the ingenuity of a divine designer. The design argument reached its peak during the seventeenth and early eighteenth century (McGrath 2011). For example, Samuel Clarke (1705: part XI, cited in Schliesser 2012: 451) proposed an a posteriori argument from design by appealing to Newtonian science, calling attention to the

exquisite regularity of all the planets’ motions without epicycles, stations, retrogradations, or any other deviation or confusion whatsoever.

A late proponent of this view of nature as a perfect smooth machine is William Paley’s Natural Theology (1802).

Another conclusion that the new laws-based physics suggested was that the universe was able to run smoothly without requiring an intervening God. The increasingly deterministic understanding of the universe, ruled by deterministic causal laws as, for example, outlined by Pierre-Simon Laplace (1749–1827), seemed to leave no room for special divine action, which is a key element of the traditional Christian doctrine of creation. Newton resisted interpretations like these in an addendum to the Principia in 1713: the planets’ motions could be explained by laws of gravity, but the positions of their orbits, and the positions of the stars—far enough apart so as not to influence each other gravitationally—required a divine explanation (Schliesser 2012). Alston (1989) argued, contra authors such as Polkinghorne (1998), that mechanistic, pre-twentieth century physics is compatible with divine action and divine free will. Assuming a completely deterministic world and divine omniscience, God could set up initial conditions and the laws of nature in such a way as to bring God’s plans about. In such a mechanistic world, every event is an indirect divine act.

Advances in twentieth-century physics, including the theories of general and special relativity, chaos theory, and quantum theory, overturned the mechanical clockwork view of creation. In the latter half of the twentieth century, chaos theory and quantum physics have been explored as possible avenues to reinterpret divine action. John Polkinghorne (1998) proposed that chaos theory not only presents epistemological limits to what we can know about the world, but that it also provides the world with an “ontological openness” in which God can operate without violating the laws of nature. One difficulty with this model is that it moves from our knowledge of the world to assumptions about how the world is: does chaos theory mean that outcomes are genuinely undetermined, or that we as limited knowers cannot predict them? Robert Russell (2006) proposed that God acts in quantum events. This would allow God to directly act in nature without having to contravene the laws of nature. His is therefore a non-interventionist model: since, under the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, there are no natural efficient causes at the quantum level, God is not reduced to a natural cause. Murphy (1995) outlined a similar bottom-up model where God acts in the space provided by quantum indeterminacy. These attempts to locate God’s actions either in chaos theory or quantum mechanics, which Lydia Jaeger (2012a) has termed “physicalism-plus-God”, have met with sharp criticism (e.g., Saunders 2002; Jaeger 2012a,b). After all, it is not even clear whether quantum theory would allow for free human action, let alone divine action, which we do not know much about (Jaeger 2012a). Next to this, William Carroll (2008), building on Thomistic philosophy, argues that authors such as Polkinghorne and Murphy are making a category mistake: God is not a cause in the way creatures are causes, competing with natural causes, and God does not need indeterminacy in order to act in the world. Rather, as primary cause God supports and grounds secondary causes. While this neo-Thomistic proposal is compatible with determinism (indeed, on this view, the precise details of physics do not matter much), it blurs the distinction between general and special divine action. Moreover, the Incarnation suggests that the idea of God as a cause among natural causes is not an alien idea in theology, and that God incarnate as Jesus at least sometimes acts as a natural cause (Sollereder 2015).

There has been a debate on the question to what extent randomness is a genuine feature of creation, and how divine action and chance interrelate. Chance and stochasticity are important features of evolutionary theory (the non-random retention of random variations). In a famous thought experiment, Gould (1989) imagined that we could rewind the tape of life back to the time of the Burgess Shale (508 million years ago); the chance that a rerun of the tape of life would end up with anything like the present-day life forms is vanishingly small. However, Simon Conway Morris (2003) has insisted species very similar to the ones we know now, including humans, would evolve under a broad range of conditions.

Under a theist interpretation, randomness could either be a merely apparent aspect of creation, or a genuine feature. Plantinga suggests that randomness is a physicalist interpretation of the evidence. God may have guided every mutation along the evolutionary process. In this way, God could

guide the course of evolutionary history by causing the right mutations to arise at the right time and preserving the forms of life that lead to the results he intends. (2011: 121)

By contrast, other authors see stochasticity as a genuine design feature, and not just as a physicalist gloss. Their challenge is to explain how divine providence is compatible with genuine randomness. (Under a deistic view, one could simply say that God started the universe up and did not interfere with how it went, but that option is not open to the theist, and most authors in the field of science and religion are not deists.) The neo-Thomist Elizabeth Johnson (1996) argues that divine providence and true randomness are compatible: God gives creatures true causal powers, thus making creation more excellent than if they lacked such powers. Random occurrences are also secondary causes. Chance is a form of divine creativity that creates novelty, variety, and freedom. One implication of this view is that God may be a risk taker—although, if God has a providential plan for possible outcomes, there is unpredictability but not risk. Johnson uses metaphors of risk taking that, on the whole, leave the creator in a position of control. Creation, then, is akin to jazz improvisation. Why would God take risks? There are several solutions to this question. The free will theodicy says that a creation that exhibits stochasticity can be truly free and autonomous:

Authentic love requires freedom, not manipulation. Such freedom is best supplied by the open contingency of evolution, and not by strings of divine direction attached to every living creature. (Miller 1999 [2007: 289])

The “only way theodicy” goes a step further, arguing that a combination of laws and chance is not only the best way, but the only way for God to achieve God’s creative plans (see, e.g., Southgate 2008 for a defense).

Christianity, Islam, and Judaism have similar creation stories, which ultimately go back to the first book of the Hebrew Bible (Genesis). According to Genesis, humans are the result of a special act of creation. Genesis 1 offers an account of the creation of the world in six days, with the creation of human beings on the sixth day. It specifies that humans were created male and female, and that they were made in God’s image. Genesis 2 provides a different order of creation, where God creates humans earlier in the sequence (before other animals), and only initially creates a man, later fashioning a woman out of the man’s rib. Islam has a creation narrative similar to Genesis 2, with Adam being fashioned out of clay. These handcrafted humans are regarded as the ancestors of all living humans today. Together with Ussher’s chronology, the received view in eighteenth-century Europe was that humans were created only about 6000 years ago, in an act of special creation.

Humans occupy a privileged position in these creation accounts. In Christianity, Judaism, and some strands of Islam, humans are created in the image of God ( imago Dei ). Humans also occupy a special place in creation as a result of the Fall. In Genesis 3, the account of the Fall stipulates that the first human couple lived in the Garden of Eden in a state of innocence and/or righteousness. This means they were able to not sin, whereas we are no longer able to refrain from sinning. By eating from the forbidden fruit of the Tree of Good and Evil they fell from this state, and death, manual labor, as well as pain in childbirth were introduced. Moreover, as a result of this so-called “original sin”, the effects of Adam’s sin are passed on to every human being. The Augustinian interpretation of original sin also emphasizes that our reasoning capacities have been marred by the distorting effects of sin (the so-called noetic effects of sin): as a result of sin, our original perceptual and reasoning capacities have been marred. This interpretation is influential in contemporary analytic philosophy of religion. For example, Plantinga (2000) appeals to the noetic effects of sin to explain religious diversity and unbelief, offering this as an explanation for why not everyone believes in God even though this belief would be properly basic.

There are different ways in which Christians have thought about the Fall and original sin. In Western Christianity, Augustine’s doctrine of original sin is very influential, though there is no generally accepted Christian doctrine on original sin (Couenhoven 2005). For Augustine, humans were in a state of original righteousness before the Fall, and by their action not only marred themselves but the entirety of creation. By contrast, Eastern Orthodox churches are more influenced by Irenaeus, an early Church Father who argued that humans were originally innocent and immature, rather than righteous. John Hick (1966) was an influential proponent of “Irenaean style” theodicy in contemporary Christianity.

Over the past decades, authors in the Christian religion and science literature have explored these two interpretations (Irenaean, Augustinian) and how they can be made compatible with scientific findings (see De Smedt and De Cruz 2020 for a review). Scientific findings and theories relevant to human origins come from a range of disciplines, in particular geology, paleoanthropology (the study of ancestral hominins, using fossils and other evidence), archaeology, and evolutionary biology. These findings challenge traditional religious accounts of humanity, including the special creation of humans, the imago Dei , the historical Adam and Eve, and original sin.

In natural philosophy, the dethroning of humanity from its position as a specially created species predates Darwin and can already be found in early transmutationist publications. For example, Benoît de Maillet’s posthumously published Telliamed (1748, the title is his name in reverse) traces the origins of humans and other terrestrial animals from sea creatures. Jean-Baptiste Lamarck proposed chimpanzees as the ancestors to humans in his Philosophie Zoologique (1809). The Scottish publisher and geologist Robert Chambers’ anonymously published Vestiges of Creation (1844) stirred controversy with its detailed naturalistic account of the origin of species. He proposed that the first organisms arose through spontaneous generation, and that all subsequent organisms evolved from them. Moreover, he argued that humans have a single evolutionary origin:

The probability may now be assumed that the human race sprung from one stock, which was at first in a state of simplicity, if not barbarism (1844: 305)

a view starkly different from the Augustinian interpretation of humanity as being in a prelapsarian state of perfection.

Darwin was initially reluctant to publish on human origins. While he did not discuss human evolution in his Origin of Species , he promised, “Light will be thrown on the origin of man and his history” (1859: 487). Huxley (1863) wrote Man’s Place in Nature , the first book on human evolution from a Darwinian point of view which discussed fossil evidence, such as the then recently uncovered Neanderthal fossils from Gibraltar. Darwin’s (1871) Descent of Man identified Africa as the likely place where humans originated, and used comparative anatomy to demonstrate that chimpanzees and gorillas were closely related to humans. In the twentieth century, paleoanthropologists debated whether humans separated from the other great apes (at the time wrongly classified into the paraphyletic group Pongidae ) about 15 million years ago, or about 5 million years ago. Molecular clocks—first immune responses (e.g., Sarich & Wilson 1967), then direct genetic evidence (e.g., Rieux et al. 2014)—favor the shorter chronology.

The discovery of many hominin fossils, including Ardipithecus ramidus (4.4 million years ago), Australopithecus afarensis (nicknamed “Lucy”), about 3.5 million years old, the Sima de los Huesos hominins (about 400,000 years old, ancestors to the Neanderthals), Homo neanderthalensis , and the intriguing Homo floresiensis (small hominins who lived on the island of Flores, Indonesia, dated to 700,000–50,000 years ago) have created a rich, complex picture of hominin evolution. These finds are supplemented by detailed analyses of ancient DNA extracted from fossil remains, bringing to light a previously unknown species of hominin (the Denisovans) who lived in Siberia up to about 40,000 years ago. Taken together, this evidence indicates that humans did not evolve in a simple linear fashion, but that human evolution resembles an intricate branching tree with many dead ends, in line with the evolution of other species. Genetic and fossil evidence favors a predominantly African origin of our species Homo sapiens (as early as 315,000 years ago) with limited gene-flow from other hominin species such as Neanderthals and Denisovans (see, e.g., Richter et al. 2017).

In the light of these scientific findings, contemporary science and religion authors have reconsidered the questions of human uniqueness, imago Dei , the Incarnation, and the historicity of original sin. Some authors have attempted to reinterpret human uniqueness as a number of species-specific cognitive and behavioral adaptations. For example, van Huyssteen (2006) considers the ability of humans to engage in cultural and symbolic behavior, which became prevalent in the Upper Paleolithic, as a key feature of uniquely human behavior. Other theologians have opted to broaden the notion of imago Dei. Given what we know about the capacities for morality and reason in non-human animals, Celia Deane-Drummond (2012) and Oliver Putz (2009) reject an ontological distinction between humans and non-human animals, and argue for a reconceptualization of the imago Dei to include at least some nonhuman animals. Joshua Moritz (2011) raises the question of whether extinct hominin species, such as Homo neanderthalensis and Homo floresiensis , which co-existed with Homo sapiens for some part of prehistory, partook in the divine image.

There is also discussion of how we can understand the Incarnation (the belief that Jesus, the second person of the Trinity, became a human being) with the evidence we have of human evolution. Some interpret Christ’s divine nature quite liberally. For instance, Peacocke (1979) regarded Jesus as the point where humanity is perfect for the first time. Christ is the progression and culmination of what evolution has been working toward in the teleological, progressivist interpretation of evolution by Teilhard de Chardin (1971). According to Teilhard, evil is still horrible but no longer incomprehensible; it becomes a natural feature of creation—since God chose evolution as his mode of creation, evil arises as an inevitable byproduct. Deane-Drummond (2009), however, points out that this interpretation is problematic: Teilhard worked within a Spencerian progressivist model of evolution, and he was anthropocentric, seeing humanity as the culmination of evolution. Contemporary evolutionary theory has repudiated the Spencerian progressivist view, and adheres to a stricter Darwinian model. Deane-Drummond, who regards human morality as lying on a continuum with the social behavior of other animals, conceptualizes the Fall as a mythical, rather than a historical event. It represents humanity’s sharper awareness of moral concerns and its ability to make wrong choices. She regards Christ as incarnate wisdom, situated in a theodrama that plays against the backdrop of an evolving creation. Like all human beings, Christ is connected to the rest of creation through common descent. By saving us, he saves the whole of creation.

Debates on the Fall and the historical Adam have centered on how these narratives can be understood in the light of contemporary science. On the face of it, limitations of our cognitive capacities can be naturalistically explained as a result of biological constraints, so there seems little explanatory gain to appeal to the narrative of the Fall. Some have attempted to interpret the concepts of sin and Fall in ways that are compatible with paleoanthropology, notably Peter van Inwagen (2004) and Jamie K. Smith (2017), who have argued that God could have providentially guided hominin evolution until there was a tightly-knit community of primates, endowed with reason, language, and free will, and this community was in close union with God. At some point in history, these hominins somehow abused their free will to distance themselves from God. These narratives follow the Augustinian tradition. Others, such as John Schneider (2014, 2020), on the other hand, argue that there is no genetic or paleoanthropological evidence for such a community of superhuman beings.

This survey has given a sense of the richness of the literature of science and religion. Giving an exhaustive overview would go beyond the scope of an encyclopedia entry. Because science and religion are such broad terms, the literature has split up in diverse fields of “science engaged theology”, where a specific claim or subfield in science is studied in relation to a specific claim in theology (Perry & Ritchie 2018). For example, rather than ask if Christianity is compatible with science, one could ask whether Christian eschatology is compatible with scientific claims about cultural evolution, or the cosmic fate of the universe. As the scope of science and religion becomes less parochial and more global in its outlook, the different topics the field can engage with become very diverse.

• Al-Ghazālī, 11th century, Tahāfut al-falāsifa , translated by Sabih Ahmad Kamali as The Incoherence of the Philosophers , Lahore: Pakistan Philosophical Congress, 1963.
• Allport, Gordon W. and J. Michael Ross, 1967, “Personal Religious Orientation and Prejudice.”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 5(4): 432–443. doi:10.1037/h0021212
• Alston, William P., 1989, “God’s Action in the World”, in Divine Nature and Human Language: Essays in Philosophical Theology , , Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 197–222.
• Augustine, 416 [2002], De Genesi ad litteram , Translated as “The Literal Meaning of Genesis” in On Genesis , John E. Rotelle (ed.), Edmund Hill (trans.), (The works of Saint Augustine: A Translation for the 21st Century), Brooklyn, NY: New City Press, 2002, pp. 155–506.
• Aurobindo Ghose, 1914–19 [2005], The Life Divine , Pondicherry: Sri Aurobindo Ashram Press. Collection of essays initially published from 1914–19 and first revised and published as collection in 1939/1940, two volumes.
• Barbour, Ian G., 1966, Issues in Science and Religion , New York: Vantage.
• –––, 2000, When Science Meets Religion: Enemies, Strangers, or Partners? , New York: HarperCollins.
• Barrett, Justin L., 2004, Why Would Anyone Believe in God? , Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
• Barton, Ruth, 2018, The X-Club: Power and Authority in Victorian Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Bering, Jesse M., 2011, The God Instinct. The Psychology of Souls, Destiny and the Meaning of Life , London: Nicholas Brealy.
• Bloom, Paul, 2007, “Religion Is Natural”, Developmental Science , 10(1): 147–151. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00577.x
• Bowler, Peter J., 2001, Reconciling Science and Religion: The Debate in Early-Twentieth-Century Britain , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• –––, 2009, Monkey Trials and Gorilla Sermons: Evolution and Christianity from Darwin to Intelligent Design , Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Boyer, Pascal, 2002, Religion Explained: The Evolutionary Origins of Religious Thought , London: Vintage.
• Brooke, John Hedley, 1991, Science and Religion: Some Historical Perspectives , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781107589018
• Brooke, John Hedley and Ronald L. Numbers (eds.), 2011, Science and Religion Around the World , New York: Oxford University Press.
• Brown, C. Mackenzie, 2007, “Colonial and Post-Colonial Elaborations of Avataric Evolutionism”, Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science , 42(3): 715–748. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.2007.00862.x
• –––, 2008, “The Design Argument in Classical Hindu Thought”, International Journal of Hindu Studies , 12(2): 103–151. doi:10.1007/s11407-008-9058-8
• –––, 2012, Hindu Perspectives on Evolution: Darwin, Dharma, and Design , (Routledge Hindu Studies Series), London/New York: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203135532
• Burenina, Yulia, 2020, “Japanese Responses to Evolutionary Theory, with Particular Focus on Nichiren Buddhists”, in Asian Religious Responses to Darwinism: Evolutionary Theories in Middle Eastern, South Asian, and East Asian Cultural Contexts , C. Mackenzie Brown (ed.), (Sophia Studies in Cross-Cultural Philosophy of Traditions and Cultures 33), Cham: Springer International Publishing, 337–367. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-37340-5_14
• Cantor, Geoffrey and Chris Kenny, 2001, “Barbour’s Fourfold Way: Problems with His Taxonomy of Science‐religion Relationships”, Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science , 36(4): 765–781. doi:10.1111/0591-2385.00395
• Carroll, William E., 2008, “Divine Agency, Contemporary Physics, and the Autonomy of Nature”, The Heythrop Journal , 49(4): 582–602. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2265.2008.00385.x
• [Chambers, Robert], 1844, Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation , London: John Churchill.
• Cherry, Shai, 2003, “Three Twentieth-Century Jewish Responses to Evolutionary Theory”, Aleph: Historical Studies in Science and Judaism , 3(1): 247–290. doi:10.2979/ALE.2003.-.3.247
• Clarke, Samuel, 1705, A Demonstration of the Being and Attributes of God , London: Will. Botham.
• Collins, Robin, 2009, “The Teleological Argument: An Exploration of the Fine‐Tuning of the Universe”, in The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology , William Lane Craig and J. P. Moreland (eds.), Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, 202–281. doi:10.1002/9781444308334.ch4
• Comte, Auguste, 1841, Cours de Philosophie Positive: La Partie Historique de la Philosophie Sociale en Tout ce Qui Concerne l’État Théologique et l’État Métaphysique (vol. 5), Paris: Bachelier.
• Conway Morris, Simon, 2003, Life’s Solution: Inevitable Humans in a Lonely Universe , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511535499
• Corey, Michael A., 1994, Back to Darwin: The Scientific Case for Deistic Evolution , Lanham, MA: University Press of America.
• Couenhoven, Jesse, 2005, “St. Augustine’s Doctrine of Original Sin”, Augustinian Studies , 36(2): 359–396. doi:10.5840/augstudies200536221
• Craig, William Lane, 2003, “The Cosmological Argument”, in The Rationality of Theism , Paul Copan and Paul K. Moser (eds.), London: Routledge, pp. 112–131.
• Dajani, Rana, 2015, “Why I Teach Evolution to Muslim Students”, Nature , 520(7548): 409–409. doi:10.1038/520409a
• Dalai Lama [Tenzin Gyatso], 2005, The Universe in a Single Atom , New York: Morgan Roads Books.
• Darwin, Charles, 1859, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life , London: John Murray.
• –––, 1871, The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex , London: John Murray.
• Dawes, Gregory W., 2016, Galileo and the Conflict between Religion and Science , (Routledge Studies in the Philosophy of Religion 13), New York: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315637723
• Dawkins, Richard, 2006, The God Delusion , Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.
• Deane-Drummond, Celia, 2009, Christ and Evolution: Wonder and Wisdom , Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press.
• –––, 2012, “God’s Image and Likeness in Humans and Other Animals: Performative Soul-Making and Graced Nature”, Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science , 47(4): 934–948. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.2012.01308.x
• De Smedt, Johan and Helen De Cruz, 2020, The Challenge of Evolution to Religion , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781108685436
• Dembski, William A., 1998, The Design Inference: Eliminating Chance through Small Probabilities , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511570643
• Dhanani, Alnoor, 2002, “Islam”, in Science and Religion: A Historical Introduction , Gary B. Fengren (ed.), Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp. 73–92.
• Draper, John, 1874, History of the Conflict between Religion and Science , New York: Appleton.
• Draper, Paul, 2005, “God, Science, and Naturalism”, in The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Religion , William Wainwright (ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 272–303.
• Durkheim, Émile, 1912 [1915], Les formes élémentaires de la vie religieuse , Paris: Alcan. Translated as The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life: A Study in Religious Sociology , Joseph Ward Swain (trans.), London: Allen & Unwin, 1915.
• Ecklund, Elaine Howard, 2010, Science vs Religion: What Scientists Really Think , Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195392982.001.0001
• –––, 2021, “Science and Religion in (Global) Public Life: A Sociological Perspective”, Journal of the American Academy of Religion , 89(2): 672–700. doi:10.1093/jaarel/lfab046
• Ecklund, Elaine Howard and Christopher P. Scheitle, 2007, “Religion among Academic Scientists: Distinctions, Disciplines, and Demographics”, Social Problems , 54(2): 289–307. doi:10.1525/sp.2007.54.2.289
• Edis, Taner, 2007, An Illusion of Harmony: Science and Religion in Islam , Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.
• Evans, Michael S., 2016, Seeking Good Debate: Religion, Science, and Conflict in American Public Life , Oakland, CA: University of California Press.
• Evans-Pritchard, Edward Evans, 1937, Witchcraft, Oracles and Magic among the Azande , Oxford: The Clarendon Press. Reprinted 1965.
• Fontenelle, Bernard le Bovier de, 1724 [1824], “De l’Origine des Fables”, reprinted in Oeuvres de Fontenelle , Paris: J. Pinard, 1824, pp. 294–310.
• Forrest, Barbara, 2000, “Methodological Naturalism and Philosophical Naturalism: Clarifying the Connection”, Philo , 3(2): 7–29. doi:10.5840/philo20003213
• Forrest, Barbara and Paul R. Gross, 2004, Creationism’s Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design , New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195157420.001.0001
• Frazer, James, G., 1890, The Golden Bough: A Study in Comparative Religion , London: MacMillan.
• Freud, Sigmund, 1927, Die Zukunft einer Illusion , Leipzig, Wien & Zürich: Internationaler Psychoanalytischer Verlag.
• Garwood, Christine, 2008, Flat Earth: The History of an Infamous Idea , London: Pan Macmillan.
• Gould, Stephen J., 1989, Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History , London: Penguin.
• –––, 2001, “Nonoverlapping Magisteria”, in Intelligent Design Creationism and Its Critics , Robert T. Pennock (ed.), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 737–749.
• Grant, Edward, 1996, The Foundations of Modern Science in the Middle Ages: Their Religious, Institutional and Intellectual Contexts , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511817908
• Griffel, Frank, 2009, Al-Ghazali’s Philosophical Theology , Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331622.001.0001
• Gross, Neil and Solon Simmons, 2009, “The Religiosity of American College and University Professors”, Sociology of Religion , 70(2): 101–129. doi:10.1093/socrel/srp026
• Guessoum, Nidhal, 2011, Islam’s Quantum Question: Reconciling Muslim Tradition and Modern Science , London and New York: Tauris.
• Hameed, Salman, 2008, “Bracing for Islamic Creationism”, Science , 322(5908): 1637–1638. doi:10.1126/science.1163672
• Harris, Mark, 2013, The Nature of Creation. Examining the Bible and Science , Durham: Acumen.
• Harrison, Peter, 1998, The Bible, Protestantism, and the Rise of Natural Science , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511585524
• –––, 2007, The Fall of Man and the Foundations of Science , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511487750
• –––, 2015, The Territories of Science and Religion , Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Haught, John F., 1995, Science & Religion: From Conflict to Conversation , New York: Paulist Press.
• –––, 2000, God after Darwin: A Theology of Evolution , Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
• Hick, John, 1966, Evil and the God of Love . New York: Harper & Row.
• Hooke, Robert, 1665, Micrographia , London: The Royal Society.
• Hooykaas, Reijer, 1972, Religion and the Rise of Modern Science , Edinburgh: Scottish Academic Press.
• Hudson, Hud, 2013, “Best Possible World Theodicy”, in The Blackwell Companion to the Problem of Evil , Justin P. McBrayer and Daniel Howard-Snyder (eds.), Oxford: John Wiley & Sons, 236–250. doi:10.1002/9781118608005.ch16
• Huff, Toby E., 2003, The Rise of Early Modern Science: Islam, China and the West , second edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781316257098
• Hume, David, 1748, Philosophical Essays Concerning Human Understanding , London: A. Millar.
• –––, 1757 [2007], The Natural History of Religion , London: A. and H. Bradlaugh Bonner. Reprinted in his A Dissertation on the Passions; The Natural History of Religion: A Critical Edition , Tom L. Beauchamp (ed.), (The Clarendon Edition of the Works of David Hume), Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2007, 30–87.
• Huxley, Thomas H., 1863, Evidences as to Man’s Place in Nature , London: Williams and Norgate.
• Jaeger, Lydia, 2012a, “Against Physicalism-plus-God: How Creation Accounts for Divine Action in Nature’s World”, Faith and Philosophy , 29(3): 295–312. doi:10.5840/faithphil201229330
• –––, 2012b, What the Heavens Declare: Science in the Light of Creation , Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock.
• James, William, 1902, The Varieties of Religious Experience: A Study in Human Nature , New York: Longmans, Green.
• Jinpa, Thupten (ed.), 2017, Science and Philosophy in the Indian Buddhist Classics. Volume 1: The Physical World, Somerville: Wisdom Publications.
• John Paul II, 1996, “Truth Cannot Contradict Truth”, Address of Pope John Paul II to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences (22 October 1996). [ John Paul II 1996 available online ]
• Johnson, Elizabeth A., 1996, “Does God Play Dice? Divine Providence and Chance”, Theological Studies , 57(1): 3–18. doi:10.1177/004056399605700101
• Joseph, George Gheverghese, 1991 [2000], The Crest of the Peacock: Non-European Roots of Mathematics , London: I. B. Tauris. Second edition, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000.
• Kojonen, Erkki Vesa Rope, 2016, The Intelligent Design Debate and the Temptation of Scientism , London/New York: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315556673
• Lamarck, Jean-Baptiste, 1809, Philosophie Zoologique, ou Exposition des Considérations Relatives à l’Histoire Naturelle des Animaux , Paris: Museum d'Histoire Naturelle (Jardin des Plantes).
• Lamoureux, Denis O., 2008, Evolutionary Creation. A Christian Approach to Evolution , Cambridge, UK: Lutterworth Press.
• Legare, Cristine H., E. Margaret Evans, Karl S. Rosengren, and Paul L. Harris, 2012, “The Coexistence of Natural and Supernatural Explanations Across Cultures and Development: Coexistence of Natural and Supernatural Explanations”, Child Development , 83(3): 779–793. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01743.x
• Lemaître, Georges, 1927, “Un Univers Homogène de Masse Constante et de Rayon Croissant, Rendant Compte de la Vitesse Radiale des Nébuleuses Extra-Galactiques”, Annales de la Société Scientifique de Bruxelles A , 47: 49–59.
• Lopez, Donald S. Jr., 2008, Buddhism and Science, A Guide for the Perplexed, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Louth, Andrew, 1996, Maximus the Confessor , London and New York: Routledge.
• [Maillet, Benoît de], 1748, Telliamed, ou Entretiens d’un Philosophe Indien avec un Missionaire François, sur la Diminution de la Mer, la Formation de la Terre, l’Origine de l’Homme, etc. , Amsterdam: Chez L'honoré & fils.
• Malinowski, Bronislaw, 1925 [1992], “Magic, Science, and Religion”, in Science, Religion and Reality , James Needham (ed.), New York: Macmillan, 19–84. Reprinted in his Magic, Science, and Religion and Other Essays , Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1948. New printing, Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press, 1992.
• McGrath, Alister E., 2011, Darwinism and the Divine: Evolutionary Thought and Natural Theology , Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9781444392524
• –––, 2016, Re-Imagining Nature: The Promise of a Christian Natural Theology , Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9781119256540
• McGrath, Alister E. and Joanna Collicutt McGrath, 2007, The Dawkins Delusion? Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine , London: SPCK.
• McMahan, David L., 2009, The Making of Buddhist Modernism , Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195183276.001.0001
• Mernissi, Fatima, 1992, La Peur-Modernité: Conflit Islam Démocratie , Paris: Editions Albin Michel. Translated as Islam and Democracy: Fear of the Modern World , Mary Jo Lakeland (trans.), Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1992.
• Merrick, Teri, 2020, Helmholtz, Cohen, and Frege on Progress and Fidelity: Sinning Against Science and Religion , (Philosophical Studies in Contemporary Culture 27), Cham: Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-57299-0
• Miller, Kenneth R., 1999 [2007], Finding Darwin’s God: A Scientist’s Search for Common Ground between God and Evolution , New York: Cliff Street Books. Reprinting, New York: Harper, 2007.
• Moritz, Joshua M., 2011, “Evolution, the End of Human Uniqueness, and the Election of the Imago Dei ”, Theology and Science , 9(3): 307–339. doi:10.1080/14746700.2011.587665
• Murphy, Nancey, 1995, “Divine Action in the Natural Order: Buridan’s Ass and Schrödinger’s Cat”, in Chaos and Complexity: Scientific Perspectives on Divine Action (Volume 2) , Robert J. Russell, Nancey Murphy, and Arthur Peacocke (eds.), Berkeley, CA: Vatican Observatory Publications; Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences, pp. 325–358.
• Norenzayan, Ara, 2013, Big Gods: How Religion Transformed Cooperation and Conflict , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Okasha, Samir, 2018, Agents and Goals in Evolution , Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198815082.001.0001
• Outler, Albert C., 1985, “The Wesleyan Quadrilateral—in John Wesley”, Wesleyan Theological Journal , 20(1): 7–18.
• Paley, William, 1802 [2006], Natural Theology or Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity , London: R. Faulder. Reprinted as Natural Theology , Matthew D. Eddy and David Knight (eds.), (Oxford World’s Classics), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
• Pannenberg, Wolfhart, 2002, “The Concept of Miracle”, Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science , 37(3): 759–762. doi:10.1111/1467-9744.00452
• Peacocke, Arthur R., 1979, Creation and the World of Science: The Re-Shaping of Belief , Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
• –––, 1984, Intimations of Reality: Critical Realism in Science and Religion , Greencastle, IN: DePauw University.
• Pennock, Robert T., 1998, “The Prospects for a Theistic Science”, Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith , 50: 205–209.
• Perry, John and Sarah Lane Ritchie, 2018, “Magnets, Magic, and Other Anomalies: In Defense of Methodological Naturalism”, Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science , 53(4): 1064–1093. doi:10.1111/zygo.12473
• Peters, Ted and Martinez Hewlett, 2003, Evolution from Creation to New Creation: Conflict, Conversation, and Convergence , Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press.
• Philipse, Herman, 2012, God in the Age of Science? A Critique of Religious Reason , Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199697533.001.0001
• Pitts, J. Brian, 2008, “Why the Big Bang Singularity Does Not Help the Kalām Cosmological Argument for Theism”, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science , 59(4): 675–708. doi:10.1093/bjps/axn032
• Plantinga, Alvin, 1993, Warrant and Proper Function , New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/0195078640.001.0001
• –––, 2000, Warranted Christian Belief , New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/0195131932.001.0001
• –––, 2011, Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, and Naturalism , Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199812097.001.0001
• Polkinghorne, John, 1998, Science and Theology: An Introduction , Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press.
• Popper, Karl, 1959, The Logic of Scientific Discovery , New York: Hutchinson.
• Purzycki, Benjamin G. and Richard Sosis, 2022, Religion Evolving. Cultural, Cognitive, and Ecological Dynamics , Sheffield: Equinox.
• Putz, Oliver, 2009, “Moral Apes, Human Uniqueness, and the Image of God”, Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science , 44(3): 613–624. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.2009.01019.x
• Richter, Daniel, Rainer Grün, Renaud Joannes-Boyau, Teresa E. Steele, Fethi Amani, Mathieu Rué, Paul Fernandes, Jean-Paul Raynal, Denis Geraads, Abdelouahed Ben-Ncer, Jean-Jacques Hublin, and Shannon P. McPherron, 2017, “The Age of the Hominin Fossils from Jebel Irhoud, Morocco, and the Origins of the Middle Stone Age”, Nature , 546(7657): 293–296. doi:10.1038/nature22335
• Rieux, Adrien, Anders Eriksson, Mingkun Li, Benjamin Sobkowiak, Lucy A. Weinert, Vera Warmuth, Andres Ruiz-Linares, Andrea Manica, and François Balloux, 2014, “Improved Calibration of the Human Mitochondrial Clock Using Ancient Genomes”, Molecular Biology and Evolution , 31(10): 2780–2792. doi:10.1093/molbev/msu222
• Ritzinger, Justin R., 2013, “Dependent Co-evolution: Kropotkin’s Theory of Mutual Aid and its Appropriation by Chinese Buddhists”, Chung-Hwa Buddhist Journal , 26: 89–112. Reprinted 2020 in Asian Religious Responses to Darwinism , C. Mackenzie Brown (ed.), (Sophia Studies in Cross-Cultural Philosophy of Traditions and Cultures 33), Cham: Springer International Publishing, 319–336. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-37340-5_13
• Rosenberg, Alex, 2014, “Disenchanted Naturalism” in Contemporary Philosophical Naturalism and its Implications , Bana Bashour and Hans D. Muller (eds.), London and New York: Routledge, pp. 17–36.
• Russell, Robert, 2006, “Quantum Physics and the Theology of Non-Interventionist Objective Divine Action”, in The Oxford Handbook of Religion and Science , Philip Clayton and Zachary Simpson (eds.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 579–595.
• Russell, Robert, Nancey Murphy, and William Stoeger, S.J. (eds.), 2008, Scientific Perspectives on Divine Action. Twenty Years of Challenge and Progress , Berkeley, CA: Vatican Observatory Publications; Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences.
• Sarich, Vincent M. and Allan C. Wilson, 1967, “Immunological Time Scale for Hominid Evolution”, Science , 158(3805): 1200–1203. doi:10.1126/science.158.3805.1200
• Saunders, Nicholas, 2002, Divine Action and Modern Science , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511610035
• Schliesser, Eric, 2012, “Newton and Spinoza: On Motion and Matter (and God, of Course): Newton and Spinoza”, The Southern Journal of Philosophy , 50(3): 436–458. doi:10.1111/j.2041-6962.2012.00132.x
• Schneider, John R., 2012, “The Fall of ‘Augustinian Adam’: Original Fragility and Supralapsarian Purpose”, Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science , 47(4): 949–969. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.2012.01307.x
• –––, 2020, Animal Suffering and the Darwinian Problem of Evil , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781108767439
• Smith, James K., 2017, “What Stands on the Fall? A Philosophical Exploration”, in Evolution and the Fall , William Cavanaugh and James K. Smith (eds.), Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, pp. 48–64.
• Smith, Jonathan Z., 1998, “Religion, religions, religious”, in Critical Terms for Religious Studies , M. C. Taylor (ed.), Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 269–284.
• Sollereder, Bethany, 2015, “A Modest Objection: Neo-Thomism and God as a Cause Among Causes”, Theology and Science , 13(3): 345–353. doi:10.1080/14746700.2015.1053762
• Southgate, Christopher, 2008, The Groaning of Creation. God, Evolution and the Problem of Evil , Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press.
• Stark, Rodney, 1999, “Atheism, Faith, and the Social Scientific Study of Religion”, Journal of Contemporary Religion , 14(1): 41–62. doi:10.1080/13537909908580851
• –––, 2004, For the Glory of God: How Monotheism Led to Reformations, Science, Witch-Hunts, and the End of Slavery , Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Stenmark, Mikael, 2004, How to Relate Science and Religion: A Multidimensional Model , Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
• Subbarayappa, B.V., 2011, “Indic Religions” in Science and Religion around the World , John Hedley Brooke and Ron Numbers (eds.), New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 195–209.
• Swinburne, Richard G., 1968, “Miracles”, The Philosophical Quarterly , 18(73): 320–328. doi:10.2307/2217793
• Tanzella-Nitti, Giuseppe, 2005, “The Two Books Prior to the Scientific Revolution”, Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith , 57(3): 225–248.
• Taylor, C.A., 1996, Defining Science: A Rhetoric of Demarcation , Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
• Tennant, Frederick R., 1902, The Origin and Propagation of Sin , Cambridge: Cambridge University.
• Teilhard de Chardin, Pierre, 1971, “Christology and Evolution”, written 1933, collected in Comment je crois , Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1969. Translated in Christianity and Evolution , Rene Hague (trans.), San Diego: Harcourt, pp. 76–95.
• Torrance, Thomas F., 1969, Theological Science , London: Oxford University Press.
• Tylor, Edward Burnett, 1871, Primitive Culture: Researches into the Development of Mythology, Philosophy, Religion, Language, Art, and Custom , London: John Murray.
• Ungureanu, James, 2019, Science, Religion, and the Protestant Tradition: Retracing the Origins of Conflict, Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
• van Huyssteen, J. Wentzel, 1998, Duet or Duel? Theology and Science in a Postmodern World , London: SCM Press.
• –––, 1999, The Shaping of Rationality: Towards Interdisciplinary in Theology and Science , Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
• –––, 2006, Alone in the World? Human Uniqueness in Science and Theology , Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
• van Inwagen, Peter, 2004, “The Argument from Evil”, in Christian Faith and the Problem of Evil , Peter van Inwagen (ed.), Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, pp. 55–73.
• Vivekananda, Swami, 1904, “The Vedanta for the World”, in Aspects of the Vedanta , Madras: Natesan & Co, pp. 124–160.
• Whewell, William, 1834, “On the Connexion of the Physical Sciences. By Mrs. Somerville”, Quarterly Review , 51: 54–68.
• White, Andrew Dickson, 1896, A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom , New York: Appleton.
• White, Claire, 2021, An Introduction to the Cognitive Science of Religion. Connecting Evolution, Brain, Cognition and Culture, Abingdon & New York: Routledge.
• Wildman, Wesley, 2008, “The Divine Action Project, 1988–2003”, in Scientific Perspectives on Divine Action: Twenty Years of Challenge and Progress , Robert Russell, Nancey Murphy, and William Stoeger (eds.), Berkeley, CA: Vatican Observatory Publications; Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences, pp. 133–176.
• Worrall, John, 2004, “Science Discredits Religion”, in Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Religion , Michael L. Peterson and Raymond J. VanArragon (eds.), Malden, MA: Blackwell, pp. 59–72.
• Clayton, Philip and Zachary Simpson (eds.), 2006, The Oxford Handbook of Religion and Science , Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199543656.001.0001
• Dixon, Thomas, G. N. Cantor, and Stephen Pumfrey (eds.), 2010, Science and Religion: New Historical Perspectives , Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Fehige, Yiftach (ed.), 2016, Science and Religion: East and West , London: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315659831
• Harrison, Peter (ed.), 2010, The Cambridge Companion to Science and Religion , Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CCOL9780521885386
• McGrath, Alister, 2020, Science and Religion: A New Introduction , third edition, Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
• Stump, J. B. and Alan G. Padgett (eds.), 2012, The Blackwell Companion to Science and Christianity , Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons. doi:10.1002/9781118241455

How to cite this entry . Preview the PDF version of this entry at the Friends of the SEP Society . Look up topics and thinkers related to this entry at the Internet Philosophy Ontology Project (InPhO). Enhanced bibliography for this entry at PhilPapers , with links to its database.

• Brown, Malcolm, 2008, “Good Religion Needs Good science”, Church of England web site. [ Brown 2008 available online (archived) ].
• Hackett, Conrad, 2015, “By 2050, India to Have World’s Largest Populations of Hindus and Muslims”, 21 April 2015, Pew Research Center. [ Hackett 2015 available online ].
• Mitelman, Geoffrey A., 2011, “Why Judaism Embraces Science”, HuffPost , 20 June 2011; reposted on Dialogue on Science, Ethics, and Religion web site. Mitelman 2011 available online
• Pew Forum, 2021, “Most U.S. Jews Identify as Democrats, but Most Orthodox Are Republicans”, Pew Research Center’s Religion & Public Life Project, 4 May 2021. [ Pew Forum 2021 available online ]
• Plantinga, Alvin, “Religion and Science”, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = < https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/religion-science/ >. [This was the previous entry on religion and science in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy — see the version history .]
• Wikipedia article on the relationship between religion and science .
• National Center for Science Education: Science and Religion .
• Evolution Resources by Kenneth R. Miller .

Comte, Auguste | cosmological argument | Hume, David: on religion | teleology: teleological arguments for God’s existence | theology, natural and natural religion

Acknowledgments

Many thanks to Bryce Huebner, Evan Thompson, Meir-Simchah Panzer, Teri Merrick, Geoff Mitelman, Joshua Yuter, Katherine Dormandy, Isaac Choi, Egil Asprem, Johan De Smedt, Taede Smedes, H.E. Baber, Fabio Gironi, Erkki Kojonen, Andreas Reif, Raphael Neelamkavil, Hans Van Eyghen, and Nicholas Joll, for their feedback on an earlier version of this manuscript.

Copyright © 2022 by Helen De Cruz < helen . decruz @ slu . edu >

• Accessibility

Support SEP

Mirror sites.

View this site from another server:

• Info about mirror sites

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy is copyright © 2023 by The Metaphysics Research Lab , Department of Philosophy, Stanford University

Library of Congress Catalog Data: ISSN 1095-5054

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• CAREER FEATURE
• 20 May 2024

How religious scientists balance work and faith

• Anne Marie Conlon

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

You have full access to this article via your institution.

In Varanasi, India, biotechnologist Anurag Chaurasia collects water samples from the River Ganges, which is sacred to Hindus. Credit: Shri Kashi Vishwanath Baba

For the past 20 years, Elaine Howard Ecklund has studied scientists’ attitudes towards religion. What she’s found, through more than 40,000 surveys and nearly 2,500 confidential interviews, is that there are more religious scientists than many people would expect. In one study, at least 30% of respondents declared a religious affiliation ( E. H. Ecklund et al. Socius https://doi.org/mvrv; 2016 ).This study surveyed scientists from eight countries and regions, including the United Kingdom, India, Hong Kong, Turkey and the United States. Globally, around 85% of the population identifies as religious (see go.nature.com/3yatbk5 ). Ecklund’s research has also found that scientists are not always open about their faith at work or in education settings. “I think there is the perception sometimes that other scientists won’t take you seriously if you talk about your faith,” says Ecklund, a sociologist based at Rice University in Houston, Texas.

Confidentiality, says Ecklund, allowed the scientists she surveyed to be more open about their faith than they might otherwise have been. “They were almost waiting to talk about it,” she says. “They feel like there’s so much silence within the scientific community about religion — it felt somewhat of a relief to talk about their own approach to religion in a safe environment.”

Ecklund has also found that many scientists are quite open to their colleagues’ beliefs. “Atheist scientists are much less negative about religion than we might be led to believe by the loudest voices, which we often think are the most numerous ones. And that’s often not the case,” she says. For example, her 2016 study found that in the United States, two-thirds of scientists do not view the science–religion relationship as one of conflict.

Serving science and the Church as the Pope’s astronomer

Ecklund has found that attitudes to faith in the workplace vary by country. For example, she says, “Indian scientists assume that there’ll be more discussion of religion within scientific contexts. So, there’s sometimes blessings over experiments. There is an assumption that staff in a lab will want to have time off for spiritual and religious holidays.”

Nature spoke to five religious scientists about how they navigate faith at work. Their experiences differ, but none felt a conflict between their beliefs and their science. Although none had experienced any direct discrimination on the basis of their religion, some did admit to being less open about their faith in particular professional contexts.

Many say that science and religion work in harmony as ways of understanding the world. Anurag Chaurasia, a biotechnologist with the Indian Council of Agricultural Research in Varanasi, recalls how, as a graduate student, he and his classmates would follow the guiding principles of the Hindu text the Bhagavad Gita to help them find direction. When experiments went awry, for example, their professor would instruct them: “Read the first message of this book, ‘Do your duty without being attached to the fruits of your action; do your duty selflessly.’” This guidance, says Chaurasia, taught him and his colleagues perseverance and how to handle failure. Bhagavad Gita principles also shaped group yoga sessions to aid relaxation and support good mental health, and brought them together as a team.

Re-examination

Mikaela Lee, a technical instructor in biomedical sciences at Solent University in Southampton, UK, says that her strong Christian faith informs her world view. “The way I approach science, personally, is as a way to glorify God and find out more about his creation,” she adds.

Raised in California as an evangelical Christian, Lee experienced how a more conservative set of beliefs can be in conflict with science. “I grew up believing in creationism, that God created the world. Evolution was kind of like a dirty word in my church,” she says. “But I also believed that we, as human beings, had almost an obligation to study the natural world and discover things about it, especially for medical research. And as I got older, I decided that you couldn’t take bits and pieces: you either had to accept all of the science or none of it.” This led her to adjust her religious beliefs to accommodate scientific evidence.

“The evidence that I saw was quite convincing. When we studied evolution in school, it kind of clicked in my brain. And it doesn’t just make sense. It’s beautiful. It’s elegant. That was the tipping point for me.” Lee found herself re-examining many of the conservative beliefs that she’d been taught growing up. After moving to the United Kingdom for university in 2018, she joined the more liberal United Reformed Church, which, she says, has many scientist members.

Climate scientist Benjamin Grandey has been able to have conversations about his religious faith at work thanks to an open workplace culture. Credit: Benjamin Stephen Grandey

For climate scientist Benjamin Grandey, who is based in Singapore, his Christian faith informs his science: “My theology helps me to appreciate the value of why science works, because I believe in a God who has made a very ordered Universe, and that he has given us, as human beings, the ability to understand a lot about that Universe.” For example, Grandey points out that mathematics, a human construct, is “so good at providing tools to describe physical phenomena in the world beyond our minds”.

Assumed atheism

Sociologist Christopher Scheitle surveyed more than 1,300 graduate students about their experiences and their attitudes to religion. He found that many religious people studying science struggle to be open about their faith, reporting a culture of ‘assumed atheism’ that often led them to conceal their religion for fear of being judged or discriminated against (see go.nature.com/4brey69 ). “I remember having several conversations with students who were very thoughtful about hiding the fact that they were religious,” says Scheitle, who is based at West Virginia University in Morgantown. One said that she purposely avoided revealing her religious beliefs until she had established herself as a scientist. “Her fear was that if people knew early in the programme, she would immediately be labelled as ‘not a serious scientist’.”

Religion and science can have a true dialogue

Their fears were understandable, because the culture of assumed atheism meant that other students and professors felt they could speak dismissively about religion, Scheitle says. “Among students who are more religious, it is a fairly common experience that they hear offhand negative or stereotypical comments about religion or religious people,” he adds, either in the classroom or in the laboratory or departmental offices.

As Scheitle notes in his 2023 book The Faithful Scientist , when people conceal a part of their identity, it can be isolating. “Research has found that this concealment itself often ends up being harmful to their own psychological well-being and to their sense of connection to others,” he writes.

Some graduate students that Scheitle spoke to have established their own communities, who meet for prayer and discussions on faith. Those who were open about their faith admitted having awkward interactions with their non-religious peers. “You can tell [that some co-workers] get uncomfortable, and they change the subject,” said one chemistry student. “It’s not something that’s deterred me from being who I am, but I hate the awkward interactions.”

Suzanne Kalka is open about her Pentecostal faith and has worked with organizations that promote harmony between science and religion in her role as a science educator based in Manchester, UK. One of these organizations is God and the Big Bang , which runs school workshops to encourage students to discuss the compatibility of science and faith. But in her previous career as a science teacher, Kalka says that she felt less free to discuss her religion. She taught mainly in secular schools, and, especially in her early career, felt a need to prove herself, deciding not to put her role at risk by singling herself out through her religious beliefs. “It’s tough, because you’re living two lives — you don’t want to risk your scientific credibility by being openly religious. I didn’t wear any kind of outward signs of any religious belief. I lived a very compartmentalized life. I wanted to be seen to be a very competent teacher of science.”

People of faith are allies to stall climate change

Towards the end of her teaching career, Kalka decided that she wanted to be more forthright about her faith. She took a role in a Church of England school and found that she could be more open. “But even there,” she added, “it was a minority of science teachers who had any religious belief at all, and it was never discussed.”

Kalka thinks that science teachers who are religious still find it difficult to be open about their beliefs. Her advice to them is to offer examples of famous scientists who combined a life of faith with their scientific achievements. She cites data showing that 75% of scientists who won a Nobel prize between 1901 and 2000 were of Judaeo-Christian faith (B. A. Shalev 100 Years of Nobel Prizes ; 2002).

An accepting culture

Faadiel Essop says that growing up in apartheid South Africa made him think more broadly about things. In the 1990s, his country rejected its history of government-sanctioned racial segregation, and he thinks that this has led to a more sensitive, tolerant society, in which he feels able to express his Muslim faith and identity. “There’s a lot of space for you to express yourself in general in society.”

A medical physiologist at Stellenbosch University in Cape Town, South Africa, and the director of the university’s Centre for Cardio-metabolic Research in Africa, Essop says there’s a strong culture of acceptance and a willingness to make accommodations for religious practices, both at Stellenbosch and across Africa more generally. Essop travels across the continent regularly for scientific meetings and says that he’s seen both Muslims and Christians being “quite comfortable to express their religion”.

Faadiel Essop says there’s a culture of openness in discussions of faith in South Africa. Credit: Wilma Stassen

Closer to home, his university colleagues are sure to provide him with halal foods (those permitted by Islamic law) at meetings or events, and the teaching schedule leaves gaps on Fridays for congregational prayers. This year, the head of his department came to speak to him before the Muslim holy month of Ramadan to discuss the daily fasts that he would be undertaking. “There is that empathy. It’s not necessary, but it’s nice. It shows that he’s got an interest, and I can explain what I do.”

An open workplace culture has also helped Grandey to be comfortable discussing his faith at work. The climate physicist moved to Singapore after growing up and completing his studies in the United Kingdom. He has found that office environments that are culturally diverse, in which people are open to discussing their personal lives, leave room for conversations about faith, too.

“In my last workplace, the Singapore–MIT Alliance for Research and Technology, it was very international, very diverse. I remember enjoying many stimulating conversations with colleagues from other Asian countries who had not had much exposure to Christianity. They were very open to learning about what I believed as a Christian, and sharing about their own beliefs, too,” says Grandey, who is now a research fellow at Nanyang Technological University.

Risks of ruling out religion

Essop sees the often-strict divide between science and religion, especially in places where he’s lived and worked in the United Kingdom and the United States, as a barrier to the free exploration of ideas. Discussing evolution and the origins of life, for example, in such environments could lead to stilted conversation.

“That’s where religion has been sidelined in a way, because the two, work and religion, are viewed as separate domains. Personally, I think they’re an integrated whole.”

From her studies, Ecklund thinks that accepting the existence of religion in a scientific context can help to encourage diversity. “Our studies show that people may be kept out of science to some extent because they’re religious, either that they don’t ever go into science, because they think religious people can’t be scientists, or that they feel like they have to hide that they’re religious.”

Sociologist Elaine Howard Ecklund studies scientists’ attitudes towards religion. Credit: Michael Stravato

Women and people of colour — groups that the scientific community strives to attract and retain — are more likely to identify as religious. “By raising suspicion about religious people, we, as scientists, may be inadvertently keeping racial and ethnic minorities and women out of science,” she says.

Essop has devised a graduate teaching module on the philosophy of science and “influences that can shape science”. He encourages other educators and researchers to fold spiritual and philosophical elements into academic discussions, because he thinks an approach to science that considers other belief systems will nurture more-inclusive attitudes in his students.

“We’ve got to look at more-holistic training,” he says, and at other systems – such as Indigenous knowledge, which has inspired “an awakening” of interest around the world. “We’re looking at science a bit differently — that it’s not just an absolute thing, but instead we consider many facets.”

Nature 629 , 957-959 (2024)

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-01471-0

Related Articles

• Scientific community

Researcher parents are paying a high price for conference travel — here’s how to fix it

Career Column 27 MAY 24

How researchers in remote regions handle the isolation

Career Feature 24 MAY 24

What steps to take when funding starts to run out

India cuts periodic table and evolution from school textbooks — experts are baffled

News 31 MAY 23

Why is India dropping evolution and the periodic table from school science?

Editorial 30 MAY 23

Treatment of missing data determined conclusions regarding moralizing gods

Matters Arising 07 JUL 21

Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Warmly Welcomes Talents Abroad

“Qiushi” Distinguished Scholar, Zhejiang University, including Professor and Physician

No. 3, Qingchun East Road, Hangzhou, Zhejiang (CN)

Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital Affiliated with Zhejiang University School of Medicine

Associate Editor, Nature Briefing

Associate Editor, Nature Briefing Permanent, full time Location: London, UK Closing date: 10th June 2024   Nature, the world’s most authoritative s...

London (Central), London (Greater) (GB)

Springer Nature Ltd

Professor, Division Director, Translational and Clinical Pharmacology

Cincinnati Children’s seeks a director of the Division of Translational and Clinical Pharmacology.

Cincinnati, Ohio

Cincinnati Children's Hospital & Medical Center

Data Analyst for Gene Regulation as an Academic Functional Specialist

The Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn is an international research university with a broad spectrum of subjects. With 200 years of his...

53113, Bonn (DE)

Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität

Recruitment of Global Talent at the Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences (IOZ, CAS)

The Institute of Zoology (IOZ), Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), is seeking global talents around the world.

Beijing, China

Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences (IOZ, CAS)

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

La science s'oppose‑t‑elle à la religion ?

Texte 6 la science s'oppose au dogmatisme.

• Croire / Savoir p. 365

Texte 7 Croire n'est pas savoir

• Transcendant / Immanent p. 365

Le pari pascalien

Texte 8 crainte et superstition.

Que l'auteur déclare-t-il ?

Texte 9 le savoir cache une croyance.

Commentaire

Croire en la vérité .

• Question : Sans cette foi en la vérité, la démarche scientifique serait‑elle déclenchée ?
• Objectif : Montrer qu'une forme de religiosité, de croyance, est nécessaire pour entreprendre la démarche scientifique, ce qui n'empêche pas d'interroger ce point de départ par la suite.

Une erreur sur la page ? Une idée à proposer ?

Nos manuels sont collaboratifs, n'hésitez pas à nous en faire part.

Oups, une coquille

j'ai une idée !

Nous préparons votre page Nous vous offrons 5 essais

🎁 Dernière ligne droite ! -25% avec le code JEVEUXMONBAC2024 !  😊

La science peut-elle faire disparaître la religion ?

La religion.

phiT_1109_07_00C

France métropolitaine • Septembre 2011

dissertation • Série L

La science peut-elle faire disparaître la religion ?

Les clés du sujet

Définir les termes du sujet

Au sens large, le mot désigne un savoir. De façon plus précise, c'est un savoir fondé, démontré , qui ne varie donc pas avec les circonstances. Science s'oppose ainsi à opinion. La connaissance scientifique moderne implique l'idée d' expérimentation .

C'est une pratique collective structurée par des rites, des cultes, par lesquels une communauté de croyants affirme être liée à un ou plusieurs dieux garants de l'ordre et de la justice. Sur le plan subjectif, chaque membre du groupe est animé par une foi dans l'existence et la bienfaisance de ces divinités.

Faire disparaître

Cette expression sous-entend la présence d'un processus . La science est-elle une démarche conquérante qui, dans son parcours, chasse la religion des domaines qu'elle occupait ?

Le verbe pouvoir

Il a ici d'abord le sens de la possibilité  : la science a-t-elle les moyens de provoquer la disparition de la religion ? Un deuxième sens, celui de la légitimité , apparaîtra aussi.

Dégager la problématique et construire un plan

La problématique.

Science et religion ont eu, et ont encore parfois, des relations conflictuelles comme si toute avancée de la première signifiait un recul de la seconde. Il faut donc qu'elles aient une prétention commune . Quelle est-elle et devons-nous penser que leurs relations soient telles que les avancées de l'une chassent l'autre ?

Dans un premier temps, nous verrons les présupposés expliquant l'existence d'un conflit. Puis, nous aborderons les grands thèmes de la critique de la religion . Enfin, nous nous demanderons si la prétention scientifique à faire disparaître la religion ne révèle pas une méconnaissance par la science des limites de son domaine.

Éviter les erreurs

Faire une copie simplificatrice en faveur d'une des deux notions.

Les titres en couleurs servent à guider la lecture et ne doivent en aucun cas figurer sur la copie.

Introduction

Il est courant d'entendre opposer la science et la religion. Nous avons le sentiment que chaque avancée de l'explication scientifique se traduit par un recul des croyances religieuses. Des raisons existent à cela. L'Europe a été marquée par des conflits retentissants entre ces deux modes de pensée, comme en témoigne la condamnation de Galilée, et l'époque des Lumières a estimé que la religion était une superstition qui disparaîtrait avec les progrès des sciences de la nature.

Cependant, il est clair qu'aujourd'hui, le développement de la connaissance scientifique n'a pas supprimé la pensée religieuse. N'est-ce qu'une question de temps ou doit-on penser que la religion est un phénomène plus complexe ou plus étendu que la représentation que les Lumières s'en faisaient ?

1. Présupposés du sujet

A. démarche scientifique et attitude religieuse.

Les Grecs entendent par science un exercice du raisonnement dont la démonstration est la plus haute manifestation. La raison procède en suivant des règles de logique dont la fixité et l'impersonnalité tranchent avec l'inconstance des opinions courantes. Le géomètre, le mathématicien découvrent les propriétés immuables des figures et des nombres. Ils cherchent la connaissance des choses, alors que les opinions sont des jugements partiels et intéressés. La science est de l'ordre de la théorie , alors que la religion possède dès l'origine une dimension pratique que Durkheim a fortement soulignée. La religion est un « système solidaire de croyances et de pratiques », distinguant le sacré du profane et capable d'unir des individus dans une communauté dont ils se sentent les membres. Cette dimension sociale est importante au point que Bergson a pu écrire qu'il n'y a jamais eu de société sans religion alors que la science et la philosophie n'ont pas toujours existé. Les liens unissant des fidèles entre eux, par la médiation d'un lien commun à une autorité sacrée, ont un pouvoir de structuration, ils sont une sorte de ciment social. La religion apparaît donc comme une pensée globalisante.

B. Une question de domaine

La différence entre théorie et pratique ne suffit cependant pas à dire pourquoi la science pourrait faire disparaître la religion. Envisager ce phénomène implique que la première intervienne de façon offensive sur le terrain où la seconde la précédait. Deux questions se posent alors. Quel est ce domaine ? Quelles sont les caractéristiques de ces deux modes de pensée ? La réponse à la première question nous est donnée par l'Histoire. Il est indéniable que la science est entrée en concurrence avec les récits religieux touchant la nature , son ordre et ses lois, et qu'elle a pris parfois position dans les débats touchant la formation ou l'origine du monde . Dès lors, elle prenait une dimension métaphysique et elle mettait en cause les représentations religieuses, selon lesquelles l'ordre de l'univers ne pourrait venir que de l'action de puissances divines dont l'intelligence est à reconnaître dans les phénomènes qui nous entourent et dont la sagesse est à honorer dans des cultes.

[Transition] Ce point permet de saisir la racine du conflit dont le sujet fait état.

2. Les raisons du conflit

A. la séparation du mythe et de la raison.

Il est frappant d'apprendre qu'Anaxagore, un grand astronome grec, fut accusé d'athéisme et emprisonné pour avoir dit que le soleil était une pierre brûlante. Cette affirmation ôtait à cet astre son caractère sacré et l'intégrait dans l'univers matériel où les hommes vivent quotidiennement. L'attitude scientifique se marque par la volonté de découvrir la vraie nature et les vraies causes des phénomènes . Le développement du discours rationnel s'est fait en critiquant les récits religieux, c'est-à-dire les mythes . Le mythe est une narration touchant la naissance et le développement de l'ordre qui gouverne l'univers. Ses histoires mettent en jeu des divinités qui s'affrontent et accomplissent des exploits dans une dramaturgie dont le but est de célébrer la victoire de l'ordre sur les puissances de confusion. Or, les premiers physiciens présentent une pensée du cosmos en rupture avec cette façon de procéder. La science raisonne à partir de qualités abstraites comme « le froid », « le chaud », « le sec », « l'humide », et remplace les péripéties guerrières par des rapports mathématiques de proportionnalité. L'ordre est le résultat de relations équilibrées entre des couples d'opposés. Dès lors, le mythe devient synonyme de fable, donc de récit mensonger et absurde.

B. La dénonciation de la superstition religieuse

Ce premier coup porté aux prétentions explicatives de la religion ouvre la voie à sa définition comme une superstition . Spinoza considère que les cultes sont l'aboutissement de deux illusions qui s'enchaînent. L'ignorance native des hommes les pousse à imaginer être le centre de référence de la nature. La conscience de poursuivre des buts nous fait croire que tout ce qui nous entoure fait de même et, comme nous savons que nous ne sommes pas les auteurs des choses naturelles, nous croyons qu'elles ont été créées par des « directeurs de la nature » et nous leur rendons des hommages afin qu'ils nous soient favorables. À l'anthropocentrisme s'ajoute l'anthropomorphisme qui projette la forme et les passions humaines sur l'ensemble des phénomènes. Cette illusion s'explique par l'ignorance et par le désir de pouvoir agir sur notre milieu. La personnification des éléments naturels rend possible l'établissement d'une relation entre eux et nous. Spinoza trace ainsi le portrait de l'homme superstitieux, ignorant et angoissé, qui croit aux présages et honore des puissances supérieures pour satisfaire ses intérêts.

La science, en revanche, écarte l'idée des causes finales. Elle cherche à répondre à la question du «  comment  » et considère la nature comme un objet à étudier par le calcul et l'expérimentation. Max Weber parle de « désenchantement du monde » pour qualifier l'action de la raison scientifique à travers le temps. Les phénomènes s'expliquent par des lois et sans référence à nos désirs. À l'image d'un monde centré sur l'homme, « image de Dieu », la science physique substitue le concept d'un univers indifférent à nos souhaits et à nos craintes. Quant aux sciences naturelles, elles étudient l'histoire de notre espèce et la structure de son organisme sans y voir l'intention d'une intelligence supérieure.

[Transition] L'idée du désenchantement exprime bien le fait que les sciences ont fait reculer la religion, mais cela suffit-il à penser que leur progrès conduirait à la faire disparaître ?

3. Les limites de la science

A. la tentation scientiste.

La connaissance de la nature est devenue le domaine des sciences expérimentales, qui ne se bornent pas à décrire le réel mais l'interrogent en construisant des expérimentations de plus en plus précises, contrôlées et rendues possibles par un appareillage technique dont la sophistication ne cesse de croître. Le quantifiable, le reproductible sont les valeurs maîtresses de ces démarches. Aux récits généraux et symboliques, la science substitue la recherche de laboratoire où la théorie rend possible le développement de mesures pointues et leur expression dans une forme symbolique abstraite comme une équation. Une expérimentation n'est pas une simple observation de faits mais présuppose l'admission de plusieurs théories et la maîtrise d'un appareillage complexe.

Ces avancées ont pu faire croire que la science gouvernerait la totalité des affaires humaines. Le positivisme d'Auguste Comte en donne une expression très nette. Comte élabore la loi des trois états qui définit la période scientifique comme l'achèvement de deux âges antérieurs et imparfaits. Ainsi, l'humanité a commencé par une période théologique, dans laquelle l'ignorance des hommes les conduisit à croire en l'action de causes surnaturelles et cachées. Puis vint l'époque métaphysique, qui rationalisa ces fictions en parlant de causes premières et finales mais resta dans les erreurs de l'abstraction. Enfin, l'âge scientifique ou « positif » se libère de ces illusions pour n'étudier que les lois gouvernant les phénomènes, avec un esprit animé par le souci de la certitude et de la précision . Comte parle d'un progrès qui élimine les croyances dans une ou plusieurs divinités. La science dégage les lois de tous les phénomènes pour être la pensée universelle. On nomme cette prétention le scientisme .

B. Les deux ordres

On note toutefois que si la religion a quitté le terrain de la connaissance de la nature elle n'a pas disparu. Notre époque est même marquée par un retour du religieux. N'est-ce pas en raison de sa capacité à prendre en charge des angoisses auxquelles les sciences n'ont rien à dire ? Freud considère la religion comme une illusion, mais il reconnaît qu'elle réalise les « désirs les plus anciens, les plus forts, les plus pressants de l'humanité. » La détresse infantile suscite le désir de protection, la crainte de la mort et l'expérience des souffrances de la vie sont la cause d'un désir puissant de justice et de sens . L'absence de preuves ne nuit pas à la religion, elle prend sa source dans des sentiments liés à notre condition, non dans des démonstrations ou des expérimentations élaborées. Freud soutient que cette illusion ne peut décliner que si « notre dieu le logos » arrive à montrer à l'humanité qu'elle doit s'organiser par elle-même. Il nomme cela « l'éducation en vue de la réalité » et fait valoir l'extrême jeunesse de la pensée scientifique pour fonder sa croyance dans une disparition possible du phénomène religieux.

On peut toutefois se demander si Freud ne confond pas deux registres. La foi est une certitude subjective , issue d'une adhésion à un appel intérieurement ressenti. C'est une donation de sens qui se reçoit avant toute critique, quand la science cherche l'objectivité à travers la mise en place de procédures contrôlées. Il y a, comme le dit Pascal, deux ordres : « c'est le cœur qui sent Dieu et non la raison. Voilà ce qu'est la foi : Dieu sensible au cœur, non à la raison. » Les valeurs morales, l'interrogation sur la condition temporelle de l'homme, ne sont pas du ressort scientifique. La mort est pour le naturaliste un phénomène naturel et nécessaire, mais elle est pour chacun de nous une douleur quand nous perdons un proche. Dès lors comment la penser ? Est-ce un terme, un passage ? La liberté de la conscience est ici en jeu et elle est porteuse d'un droit qui n'est pas justiciable d'une approche scientifique.

Il est incontestable que les avancées multiples de la science dans le domaine de la connaissance de la nature ont fait reculer les récits religieux en les rabaissant au rang de mythes. Aujourd'hui, la religion ne cherche plus guère à rivaliser sur ce terrain, même si certains croyants rejettent encore Darwin. Elle reste toutefois présente sur les questions de choix moraux et constitue pour certains une réponse face à leur demande de sens. La spécificité de l'expérience de la foi la situe sur un autre plan que celui des expérimentations scientifiques, ce qui devrait empêcher les empiétements réciproques.

Pour lire la suite

Et j'accède à l'ensemble des contenus du site

Et je profite de 2 contenus gratuits

Science and Religion @ Edinburgh

School of divinity.

Science and Religion dissertations – the topics

Every year around this time our masters students in Science and Religion give a talk outlining their intended research over the coming months, as they work towards their dissertations which are the keystone to our MSc, due for submission in August. For me, as the programme manager of the MSc, this is one of the high points of the year, as I get to see how the students are developing their own thoughts way beyond the past 6 months’ classes, interaction and debate. I am always deeply impressed (and also rather humbled) by the breadth of interests and expertise.

Students are encouraged to explore any topic which falls broadly within the ‘Science-Religion’ field. The ‘classical’ field of Science and Religion, defined by the work of scholars such as Ian Barbour, Arthur Peacocke, John Polkinghorne from the 1960s to the early 2000s, is being rapidly superseded these days, as we discover more and more crucial areas of engagement between the two disciplines. Our students have uncovered a number of new areas themselves, and we were all impressed by the degree of novelty and ingenuity on display. Topics included: intercessory prayer and divine action; Teilhard de Chardin and systems biology; natural theology in McGrath and Gould; dark matter/energy and Christian mysticism; T F Torrance, Polanyi and a new theology of science; creationism is UK schools; Philip Pullman’s His Dark Materials and Nietzsche; Neanderthals and the ‘image of God’ theology; creationism and the evolution of inerrancy; critical realism and the potential influence of Polanyi; divine action in the human brain and religious belief; Sam Harris and Buddhism; the deep future, human evolution, and the ‘image of God’ theology

We look forward to seeing how these very fertile and imaginative projects emerge in the coming months.

Share this post:

Le Devoir de... La science et la religion s’affrontent dans la recherche de la vérité

La science et la religion s’affrontent dans la recherche de la vérité.

• [Le Devoir de...]

Deux fois par mois, Le Devoir lance à des passionnés de philosophie et d’histoire des idées le défi de décrypter une question d’actualité à partir des thèses d’un penseur marquant.

La gouverneure générale du Canada, Julie Payette, a créé un certain émoi l’automne dernier lorsqu’elle a mis en opposition science et religion en se disant étonnée que l’on soit « encore en train de nous demander si la vie est le résultat d’une intervention divine ou si elle résulte d’un processus naturel ou aléatoire ». Ceux qui ont dénoncé ces propos ont chacun à leur façon soutenu qu’il n’y avait pas d’opposition entre science et religion et que ces deux domaines étaient plutôt complémentaires.

Qu’en aurait pensé le philosophe britannique Bertrand Russell (1872-1970) ? Mathématicien, scientifique, homme politique, romancier et libre-penseur, Bertrand Russell est l’un des plus brillants intellectuels du XXe siècle. Il est surtout connu pour son célèbre argument de « la théière » par lequel il réfute les arguments en faveur de l’existence de Dieu (voir l’encadré). Russell se déclarait philosophiquement agnostique — parce que la science ne peut ni prouver ni réfuter certaines croyances religieuses — mais athée en pratique, parce qu’on ne peut croire qu’en ce qui est démontré par la science.

Critique virulent de la religion, Russell affirme, dans Religion and Science (1935), qu’« un credo religieux diffère d’une théorie scientifique en ce qu’il prétend exprimer la vérité éternelle et absolument certaine, tandis que la science garde un caractère provisoire […]. La science nous incite donc à abandonner la recherche de la vérité absolue, et à y substituer ce qu’on peut appeler la vérité “technique”, qui est le propre de toute théorie permettant de faire des inventions ou de prévoir l’avenir ».

À la lumière de cet extrait, science et religion ne sont pas complémentaires mais plutôt en compétition pour la recherche de la vérité. La « vérité technique » dont parle Russell est celle issue de théories vérifiées par des expériences reproductibles et qui nous permet de comprendre notre environnement et d’agir sur lui. Pour le philosophe, le « credo religieux » relève des faiblesses de l’esprit humain alors que la démarche scientifique relève de ses forces.

Le conflit entre science et religion repose donc sur des questions essentielles, comme l’origine et l’évolution de la vie auxquelles fait référence Julie Payette. Si certaines Églises ont fini par abandonner des croyances mythologiques comme l’existence historique d’Adam et Ève, c’est en espérant « garder la citadelle intacte » sur ce qui est fondamental, avance Russell.

Les comment et les pourquoi

Ceux qui considèrent que science et religion sont complémentaires soutiennent souvent que la science répond aux « comment » alors que la religion répond aux « pourquoi ». La science nous dirait comment les choses fonctionnent et la religion nous dirait pourquoi ça arrive. Cet argument ne tient pas dans la perspective russellienne. « Toute connaissance accessible doit être atteinte par des méthodes scientifiques, écrit-il. Et ce que la science ne peut pas découvrir, l’humanité ne peut pas le connaître. »

Si la religion n’apporte pas de connaissance, elle ne répond donc ni aux comment ni aux pourquoi. Le physicien français Jean Bricmont a d’ailleurs démoli cet argument des réponses spécifiques à chacune. Selon sa démonstration, la distinction entre comment et pourquoi est une fausse dichotomie puisque les seuls pourquoi auxquels nous pouvons raisonnablement apporter une réponse sont en fait des comment. Il s’agit de la version moderne de l’illusion métaphysique à laquelle s’était attaqué Emmanuel Kant en montrant qu’une croyance qui prétend être un savoir devient une illusion.

Si les croyances religieuses peuvent aider à donner un sens à la vie, il n’existe aucun moyen de tester ces réponses qui peuvent varier à l’infini. Si n’importe quelle réponse est possible, cela équivaut à une absence de réponse. Ces réponses ne complètent pas les inconnues de la science puisqu’elles ne se situent pas sur le plan des connaissances scientifiques.

Il n’y a donc pas plus de complémentarité entre science et religion lorsqu’on aborde la relation sous l’angle des pourquoi et des comment. Les réponses fiables aux comment sont ce que Russell appelle les « vérités techniques ».

Si la science et la religion constituent deux sphères différentes, on pourrait soutenir qu’elles peuvent tout de même cohabiter sans conflit si elles n’empiètent pas l’une sur l’autre. C’est la position du NOMA (Non-Overlapping Magisteria, ou non-recouvrement des magistères), pour employer l’expression du paléontologue Stephen Jay Gould. Là encore Russell ne serait pas d’accord. Pour le philosophe, non seulement la religion n’est pas complémentaire à la science, mais elle lui est grandement nuisible.

Il avance notamment les exemples du procès contre Galilée et le rejet de la théorie de l’évolution, deux conflits majeurs dans la recherche de la « vérité » et qui sont toujours d’actualité. Lorsque Stephen Hawking, par exemple, déclarait qu’« il n’est nul besoin d’invoquer Dieu pour qu’il allume la mèche et fasse naître l’Univers », le pape François récupérait et déformait grossièrement les théories de la physique quantique en soutenant que le big bang « ne contredit pas l’intervention divine de Dieu mais la requiert ».

Concernant l’évolution, les croyances religieuses constituent toujours un obstacle pour faire accepter cette théorie explicative, comme l’a déploré Julie Payette. Même si Jean-Paul II a reconnu que cette théorie est « plus qu’une hypothèse », les religions la récupèrent et la dénaturent en soutenant que Dieu a voulu que les choses soient ainsi. On pourrait ajouter les exemples de transfusion sanguine et de vaccination refusées au nom de croyances religieuses.

Pour Russell, la science est toujours sortie victorieuse de ces conflits avec la religion, et ce, pour le plus grand bien de l’humanité. « Là où des questions pratiques étaient en jeu comme pour la sorcellerie et la médecine, écrit-il, la science a prôné la diminution des souffrances, tandis que la théologie a encouragé la sauvagerie naturelle de l’homme. La diffusion de la mentalité scientifique, par opposition à la mentalité théologique, a incontestablement amélioré jusqu’ici la condition humaine. »

Science et religion ne sont donc pas deux magistères séparés ; la religion empiète inévitablement sur les platebandes de la science dans ses prétentions à la vérité.

Il subsiste toutefois un domaine où science et religion ne sont pas en conflit, selon Russell : celui de l’« émotion mystique », ou « état d’esprit religieux ». Bien que la science demeure pour lui la seule méthode pour parvenir à la connaissance, il reconnaît « la valeur des expériences qui [dans le domaine des émotions] ont donné naissance à la religion. Par suite de leur association à de fausses croyances, elles ont fait autant de mal que de bien ; libérées de cette association, on peut espérer que le bien seul restera ».

Russell estimait donc que les institutions religieuses et leurs credo théologiques pourraient en venir à disparaître face aux succès de la science et que seul subsisterait l’« esprit religieux » qui leur a donné naissance et qui est porteur d’une « véritable sagesse ». L’esprit religieux et même la « piété religieuse » dont parle le philosophe se caractérisent par l’amour de l’humanité et la confiance en ses capacités et en son avenir. Cette éthique guidée par la raison et inspirée par la compassion envers ses semblables est ce que l’on appelle aujourd’hui l’idéal de l’humanisme laïque. Bref, la règle d’or qui devrait nous guider en tout temps et en tout lieu.

Ignorance et relativisme

Près de 50 ans après la mort de Russell et malgré l’avancée fulgurante des connaissances scientifiques, on peut s’étonner du retour de la religion dans la société. Pour Russell, la religion est d’abord et avant tout fondée « sur la crainte de ce qui est mystérieux, crainte de l’échec, crainte de la mort », autant de craintes soutenues par l’ignorance. Il a de ce fait délaissé les causes biologiques des émotions et autres habiletés à l’origine de l’« esprit religieux » et de la compassion. Ces causes naturelles ne disparaissent pas avec l’avancement des connaissances.

Son diagnostic peut néanmoins être appliqué au retour du religieux : le fait que la science invalide les croyances théologiques peut susciter angoisse et crainte chez le mortel. Pour éviter la dissonance cognitive qui en résulte, l’esprit du croyant réagit en se réfugiant dans le relativisme, où science et croyance ont la même valeur, conforté en cela par les philosophes postmodernistes.

L’argument de la théière

Des commentaires ? Écrivez à Robert Dutrisac : [email protected] . Pour lire ou relire les anciens textes du Devoir de philo .

Ce texte fait partie de notre section Opinion, qui favorise une pluralité des voix et des idées en accueillant autant les analyses et commentaires de ses lecteurs que ceux de penseurs et experts d’ici et d’ailleurs. Envie d’y prendre part? Soumettez votre texte à l’adresse [email protected] . Juste envie d’en lire plus? Abonnez-vous à notre Courrier des idées .

À voir en vidéo

Home > Dedman College of Humanities & Sciences > Religious Studies > Theses and Dissertations

Religious Studies Theses and Dissertations

Theses/dissertations from 2024 2024.

Participation in the Martyred Christ: Augustine of Hippo on Martyrdom and Martyr Veneration , Matthew Esquivel

Accounting for the Gift: Theology and Ethics in Accounting , Daniel Sebastian

RADICAL EXPLORATIONS OF RADICAL EMPIRICISM: WILLIAM JAMES’S TRANSMISSIVE THEORY OF MIND IN THE CONTEXT OF VISIONARY EXPERIENCE , rita spellman

Theses/Dissertations from 2023 2023

Eudaimonist Exemplarism and Saints , Brian C. Clark

Educating a Denomination: Albert C. Outler and American Theological Education, 1925 - 1974 , Lane Davis

Rebekah Retold: A Functional Reception-Historical Analysis of Rebekah in Narrative Retellings of Genesis , Kelsey Spinnato

Monetary Muddles: Money and Language, Ethics and Theology , Tyler Womack

Theses/Dissertations from 2022 2022

Faithful: The Formation of Women's Religious and Political Identities at First Baptist Dallas , Marie Olson Purcell

Theses/Dissertations from 2021 2021

Protest and Politics: A Biographical Theology of Bayard Rustin, Friendship, Charity, and Economic Justice , Justin Barringer

A Renewed Christian Sabbath, After Supersessionism and After Christendom , Abigail Woolley Cutter

Gender as Love: A Theological Account , Fellipe do Vale

Deliver Us: The New Eve, Coredemption, and the Motherhood of God , William Glass

Trinity and Divine Subjectivity: A Study in the Trinitarian Theologies of Franz Anton Staudenmaier and Isaak August Dorner , Andrew Hamilton

Jesus Christ, Revelation of Love: A Christology of the Disabled Christ , Lisa Hancock

Ecclesial Unity in Cyril of Alexandria , Andrew Mercer

The Humanity of Christ as Instrument of Salvation in the Theology of Thomas Aquinas , J. David Moser

Honor Gained, Lost, and Restored: The Honor and Shame of Jesus in the Gospel of Mark , April Simpson

Theses/Dissertations from 2020 2020

Pluralism as a Social Practice: A Pragmatist Approach to Engaging Diversity in Public Life , Mary Leah Friedline

Religion and Rural Internationalism in the Nineteenth-Century Middle West: The Global Consciousness of Rural Dutch Middle Westerners,1865–1901 , Andrew Klumpp

Religion Wrecked Her Mind: Religious Insanity in the Nineteenth Century , Courtney Lacy

“Our Heaven Begun Below”: A Contemporary Theology of Eucharistic Sacrifice in the Wesleyan Tradition , Geoffrey C. Moore

“Lo Que Predicábamos No E[ra] Americanismo”: Protestantism and Cross-Cultural Religious Encounter in the Shadow of Empire, A Twentieth Century Cuban Case , Grace Vargas

Theses/Dissertations from 2019 2019

Augustine's Concept of Volition and Its Significance for the Doctrine of Original Sin , Scot Bontrager

Ephesians and Ecumenism , Toby Eisenberg

The Unmarried (M)Other: A Study of Christianity, Capitalism, and Counternarratives Concerning Motherhood and Marriage in the United States and South Africa , Haley Feuerbacher

John Duns Scotus On the Trinitarian Center of the Graced Life , Mitchell Kennard

“Spirited” Engagement: Latin American Faith and the Construction of Emancipative Pentecostalism , David Luckey

The Church and Social Responsibility: Contributions to Contemporary Social Ethics from the Ecumenical Social Method of the Oxford Conference on Church, Community, and State of 1937 , Gary B. MacDonald

Infertility in 1 Samuel 1: Toward a Hermeneutic of Reproduction , David A. Schones

“And They Shall Eat Until They Are Satisfied:” Critical Disability Theory and Widows, Orphans, Aliens, and Levites in the Book of Deuteronomy , Cheryl Strimple

Theses/Dissertations from 2018 2018

Believing Into Christ: Restoring the Relational Sense of Belief as Constitutive of the Christian Faith , Natalya Cherry

My Lover is Mine and I am His--The Grazer in the Lilies: A Philosophical-Literary Reading of the Song of Songs , Leslie Fuller

Mapping the Nature of Empire: The Legacy of Theological Geography in the Early Iberian Atlantic , Ángel Jazak Gallardo

The Apostolic Council of Jerusalem: Taing-Yinn Tharr (တိုင္း၇င္းသား) Apostleship as Anti-Colonial Existence , Lahpai Shawng Htoi

Human Capabilities, Religion, and Rights , Oleg Makariev

But We Know: A Feminist, Christian Ethnography and Analysis of Single, Working-Class Mothers and Class, Gender, and Race Dynamics in the U. S. Political Economy , Julie A. Mavity Maddalena

Christian Political Economy and Economic Science: A Pathway for Interdisciplinary Dialogue , Nathan McLellan

The Installation of the Human: Whiteness, Religion, and Racial Capitalism , Benjamin Robinson

Theses/Dissertations from 2017 2017

The Evangelists' Editorial Efforts; Matthean and Lukan Theology vis-a-vis a Few, Unique Parables , Benjamin C. Joseph Mr.

Christus Satisfactor: An Anselmian Approach to the Doctrine of Atonement , David M. Mahfood

Opaque Redemption: Whiteness, Theology, and the Politics of The Human , Timothy McGee

Advanced Search

• Notify me via email or RSS
• Collections
• Disciplines
• SMU Libraries
• SMU Website
• Moody School of Graduate and Advanced Studies

About | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

• USF Research
• USF Libraries

Digital Commons @ USF > College of Arts and Sciences > Religious Studies > Theses and Dissertations

Religious Studies Theses and Dissertations

Theses/dissertations from 2022 2022.

Interpreting 9/11: Religious or Political Event? , Fadime Apaydin

The need to address religious diversity at work: an all-inclusive model of spirituality at work , Ivonne Valero Cázares

Theses/Dissertations from 2021 2021

The Mass is the Medium: Marshall McLuhan and Roman Catholic Liturgical Change , Ashil D. Manohar

White Too Long: Christianity or Nationalism? , Rachel E. Osborne

"Theology" in the Public University , Sarah T. White

Theses/Dissertations from 2020 2020

Warfare in Christianity and Islam: Unveiling Secular Justifications and Motivations Behind So-Called Religious Violence , Onur Korkmaz

Legitimizing Violence: Functional Similarities of the Religious and the Secular Violence , Tahir Topal

Theses/Dissertations from 2019 2019

“Living Creatures of Every Kind:” An Ecofeminist Reading of Genesis 1-3 , T. G. Barkasy

Three Theorists on Religious Violence in an Islamic Context: Karen Armstrong, Mark Juergensmeyer, and William T. Cavanaugh , Ayse Camur

Complex Tripartite Hydro Politics of River Ganges , Muttaki Bin Kamal

Theses/Dissertations from 2016 2016

Solid Metaphor and Sacred Space: Interpreting the Paradigmatic and Syntagmatic Relations Found at Beth Alpha Synagogue , Evan Carter

Growth, and Development of Care for Leprosy Sufferers Provided by Religious Institutions from the First Century AD to the Middle Ages , Philippa Juliet Meek

Theses/Dissertations from 2015 2015

Altering Tian: Spirituality in Early Confucianism , Jacob Thomas Atkinson

Theses/Dissertations from 2014 2014

The U.S. Department of State Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives: What does the U.S. engage when they engage `religion'? , Belgica Marisol Cucalon

Rising Above a Crippling Hermeneutic , Luke Steven, Carlos, Armando Thompson

Theses/Dissertations from 2011 2011

From Cosmogony to Anthropogony: Inscribing Bodies in Vedic Cosmogony and Samskara Rituals , Christine Boulos

Theses/Dissertations from 2010 2010

Gadamer and Nāgārjuna in Play: Providing a New Anti-Objectivist Foundation for Gadamer’s Interpretive Pluralism with Nāgārjuna’s Help , Nicholas Byle

Shamanism, Spiritual Transformation and the Ethical Obligations of the Dying Person: A Narrative Approach , Ellen W. Klein

Theses/Dissertations from 2009 2009

Finding Confucianism in Scientology: A comparative analysis , John Albert Kieffer

Sympathy for the devil: A character analysis of Gibreel Farishta in Salman Rushdie's The satanic verses , Catherine Mary Lafuente

The Babel paradox , Michel Machado

Theology, Spirituality, and the Academic Study of Religion in Public Universities , Don Saunders

Broadening the Spectrum: The Religious Dimensions of the Rainbow Gatherings , Seth M. Walker

Theses/Dissertations from 2008 2008

Poetry and Ritual: The Physical Expression of Homoerotic Imagery in sama , Zachary Holladay

Religious Exiles And Emigrants: The Changing Face Of Zoroastrianism , Tara Angelique Migliore

Metropolitan Community Church: A Perfectly Queer Reading Of The Bible , Matthew D. Stewart

Theses/Dissertations from 2007 2007

(Dis)continuity between Sikhism and Islam: The development of hukam across religions , Mark Horowitz

Natural Law Ethics: A Comparison of the Theravāda and Thomistic Traditions , David Lantigua

An analysis Of Origen's charismatic ideology in his Commentary on the Gospel of John , Kimberly W. Logan-Hudson

The proliferating sacred: Secularization and postmodernity , Donald Surrency

Theses/Dissertations from 2006 2006

The commodification of yoga in contemporary U.S. culture , Michelle E. Demeter

The Middle-Class Religious Ideology and the Underclass Struggle: A Growing Divide in Black Religion , Franklin Hills Jr.

The ethics of the spirit in Galatians: Considering Paul's paranesis in the interpretation of his theology , Steven Douglas Meigs

Cicero and St. Augustine's Just War Theory: Classical Influences on a Christian Idea , Berit Van Neste

Theses/Dissertations from 2005 2005

The Origins of Jewish Apocalyptic Literature: Prophecy, Babylon, and 1 Enoch , Sarah Robinson

Theses/Dissertations from 2004 2004

Sports and the American Sacred: What are the Limits of Civil Religion? , Frank Ferreri

Radical Religious Groups and Government Policy: A Critical Evaluation , Tori Chambers Lockler

“Symbolism of Language: A Study in the Dialogue of Power Between the Imperial Cult and the Synoptic Gospels” , Sharon Matlock-Marsh

Near-Death Experiences, Religion, and Life After Death , Holly Wallace

Advanced Search

• Email Notifications and RSS
• All Collections
• USF Faculty Publications
• Open Access Journals
• Conferences and Events
• Theses and Dissertations
• Textbooks Collection

Useful Links

• Religious Studies Department Homepage
• Rights Information
• SelectedWorks
• Submit Research

Home | About | Help | My Account | Accessibility Statement | Language and Diversity Statements

Privacy Copyright

• Archives du BAC (43 531)
• Art (11 061)
• Biographies (6 177)
• Divers (47 455)
• Histoire et Géographie (17 971)
• Littérature (30 273)
• Loisirs et Sports (3 295)
• Monde du Travail (32 158)
• Philosophie (9 544)
• Politique et International (18 653)
• Psychologie (2 956)
• Rapports de Stage (6 975)
• Religion et Spiritualité (1 441)
• Sante et Culture (6 435)
• Sciences Economiques et Sociales (23 576)
• Sciences et Technologies (11 297)
• Société (10 929)
• Page d'accueil
• / Philosophie
• / La religion

La religion et la science

Par le_ptit_protege   •  1 Novembre 2018  •  Dissertation  •  1 132 Mots (5 Pages)  •  2 516 Vues

Philosophie

                La science et la religion sont elles incompatibles ?

Religion : croyance  / textes / communauté / réservée / pas rationnelle  / miracle / fixe / foi / obéir / interprétation / Morale  / symbolique / mort / question existentielles / sens

Science : preuve / expérience / reflexion / ouvert / hypothèse / rationnelle  / proposition de loi / théorie / savoir / évolution / comprendre  / vérité

Incompatible : conflit / désaccord / pas de point commun / opposition / s'éxcluent

II - Buts de la Science et de la Religion

III – Point commun > Croyance

Nous allons donc à présent nous interroger sur le but de chacune des deux disciplines.

Dans un deuxième temps, on peut dire que ces deux disciplines ne sont pas vraiment incompatibles. En effet ces deux disciplines traitent d'un même sujet mais sous deux points de vus différents. On pourrait dire que Religion et Science sont deux mondes totalement différents, celles-ci se posent des questions sur l'existence de l'Homme. Par exemple la religion nous dit que l'Homme a été créé par L’Éternel Dieu, dans le Livre de la Genèse (premier livre de la Bible qui raconte le développement de l'humanité ) on nous dit « Dieu forma l'homme de la poussière de la terre, il souffla dans ses narines un souffle de vie et l'homme devint un être vivant » tandis que la Science prétend que « de la même manière que d'autres espèces avaient dû provenir d'espèces préexistantes différentes, l'homme avait dû apparaître sur terre par suite d'une évolution à partir d'une lignée animale voisine. » Ainsi on peut dire que la Religion  et la Science ne se posent pas forcément les mêmes questions mais se confrontent sur des sujets similaires comme la création de l'Univers ou de l'Homme.

Les deux disciplines cherchent a savoir comment l'Homme est parvenu sur Terre et toutes deux ont leurs idées. Cependant la Religion s’intéresse aux questions existentielles, la présence de l'au-delà, l'existence de Dieu, la relation des hommes avec lui, et s'oriente donc sur le «pourquoi» de l'existence alors que la Science se base sur des théories, des phénomènes , des mécanismes et des principes, elle créée des lois physique. On peut dire qu'elle traite le «comment» de l'existence. Cependant les limites de la science sont réelles, comme le met en valeur Pierre Karli « notre soif de signification et d'espérance n'est pas prise en compte par la science, car on ne sait pas l'introduire dans les équations ! ». Un biologiste du nom de Stephen Jay Gould a déclaré que La Science et la Religion étaient deux choses distinctes. Il les a nommées « les Magistères sans Chevauchement » ou NOMA. Ce qui veut dire que la Science par exemple, peut affirmait si telle ou telle chose s'est passées ou comment celles-ci sont arrivées mais la raison pour laquelle elles sont arrivées, les morales et ses implications, c'était le domaine de la Religion. On peut dire que le but de la Religion est de donner une morale alors que la Science a pour but de comprendre, de connaître la vérité d'ou la question du comment de l'existence de l'Homme.

Nous venons de voir que la Science et la Religion étaient toujours incompatibles, cependant on a pu voir comme une part de conciliation car on a dit qu'elles traitaient de sujets similaires mais qu'elles ne se posaient pas les mêmes questions. Mais il y a pour autant toujours une question de compatibilité qui se pose, donc nous allons voir les points communs de celles-ci.

Dans un troisième temps, on peut dire que ces deux disciplines sont compatibles et même qu'elles se complètent. En effet, la Science a quelque chose a dire sur la moralité. Sam Harris a écrit un livre sur ce concept, on appelle cela le paysage moral. Une des idées dont il parle dans son livre concerne la manière dont Science peut réellement nous dire ce qui augmente ou diminue le plaisir des gens, et nous pouvons travailler dans nos vies pour nous assurer que les bonnes choses arrivent le plus souvent.

• How it works

Useful Links

How much will your dissertation cost?

Have an expert academic write your dissertation paper!

Dissertation Services

Get unlimited topic ideas and a dissertation plan for just £45.00

Order topics and plan

Get 1 free topic in your area of study with aim and justification

Yes I want the free topic

Religion, Theology and Philosophy Dissertation Topics

Published by Alvin Nicolas at January 6th, 2023 , Revised On March 17, 2023

Introduction

As part of the religious, theology, and philosophy studies course, dissertation writing is inherently vital to the final result. Various religions are practised in the world today. Some of the major religions include; Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, and Sikhism.

In the contemporary world, religion is often not associated with politics and worldly life. Nevertheless, we can not deny its relationship and influence on humans and global peace. Therefore it is vital to choose a research topic that adds to the current body of literature.

To help you choose an appropriate topic and its subsequent research methodology, below is a list of issues classified using the thematic and exploratory approach for the religious studies dissertation.

PhD qualified writers of our team have developed these topics, so you can trust to use these topics for drafting your dissertation.

You may also want to start your dissertation by requesting  a brief research proposal  from our writers on any of these topics, which includes an  introduction  to the problem,  research question , aim and objectives,  literature review ,  along with the proposed  methodology  of research to be conducted.  Let us know  if you need any help in getting started.

Check our  dissertation example  to get an idea of  how to structure your dissertation .

W“Our expert dissertation writers can help you with all stages of the dissertation writing process including topic research and selection, dissertation plan, dissertation proposal, methodology, statistical analysis, primary and secondary research, findings and analysis, and complete dissertation writing.“

2022 Religion, Theology and Philosophy Research Topics

Does religion make society patriarchal, or does society make religion patriarchal a historical analysis of islam and hinduism in southasia.

Research Aim: This research aims to find the relationship between patriarchal society and religion. It will analyse a causal link between both phenomena by discovering whether faith makes society patriarchal or a particular social structure that makes religion patriarchal. And to show this relationship, this research will use Islam and Hinduism as a case study to establish whether these religions made SouthAsian countries patriarchal or these countries with their specific cultures and traditions made these religions patriarchal.

The Role of Feminist Religious Movements in Promoting Gender Equality- A Feminist Critique of Christianity and Islam on Lacking Gender Equality

Research Aim: This research explores the impact of feminist religious movements on gender equality worldwide. It presents a historical view of how changing women’s religious ideologies helped them attain their rights worldwide. Moreover, it offers a thorough feminist critique of the world’s two most followed religions, Christianity and Islam, on how they cannot provide women with their due rights. Keeping in view how these religions failed to give women their rights, it will show how the increasing role of women in these religions helped them get their rights.

Who Does it Better? Western vs Eastern Philosophy in Defining the Role of Genders in Society- An Analysis Through a Plutonic Lens

Research Aim: This research compares Western and Eastern philosophies in defining the gender roles in society through a Platonic point of view. It will reach and contrast both perspectives regarding treating men and women in various societal parts. Then it will use Pluto’s philosophical theories to show which philosophy has defined these roles better by providing a detailed critique on both. Lastly, as objectively as possible, it will show which philosophy is better through various metrics defined by Pluto and other Western and Eastern Philosophers.

Does God Promote Wars? The Role of Religion in the World Wars: A Critique of Richard Dawkins

Research Aim: This research sheds light on a crucial debate in religion and wars studies whether religion has something to do with wars. It will analyse the world wars to show whether religious elements made conflicts worse or other factors that overshadowed the spiritual aspects. Furthermore, it will include the viewpoint of famous evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, a part of the neo-atheist movement. His critique of God and religions will help to understand the relationship comprehensively.

Does Power Corrupt Religion? The Role of State in Using Religious Actors for its Political Motives- A Case of the US and Al Qaeda

Research Aim: This research shows how enormous political powers can use religion as a tool for their political motives. It will analyse a state’s channels to influence religion in a country or other countries. Moreover, it will identify which immense political powers fulfilled primary political motives throughout history. And more specifically, it will use US and AlQaeda as a case study of how the US used them for their reasons and what happened when they weren’t able to control them.

Covid-19 Religion, Theology and Philosophy Research Topics

Religious communities and coronavirus pandemic.

Research Aim: This study will focus on reviewing the contribution of religious communities to combat the Coronavirus Pandemic.

Indian religious politics during the Coronavirus pandemic

Research Aim: This study will investigate the issues and conflicts that arose in India during the outbreak of COVID-19 and the response of the international countries on it.

Theology and Coronavirus crisis

Research Aim: This study will focus on theological studies on the Coronavirus pandemic.

Philosophy, science, and religion during Coronavirus

Research Aim: This study will address the importance of philosophy, science, and religion in combatting Coronavirus.

World Religions Dissertation Topics

Under the category of world religion, the teaching courses cover a range of topics, including the traditional aspects and forms of religion found globally, including the mainstream practising religions such as Buddhism or Catholicism, fastest-growing religion like Islam, and belief systems such as the traditions of the Samurai tribe.

Given the highly diverse nature of faith, it is pertinent to explore and analyse this diversity in terms of the continuous evolution of the human race. The list of topics below provides a focused thematic and exploratory approach that may be used for world religion research dissertation purposes.

Topic 1: Increasing Islamophobia in the Western Countries, Its Causes and Possible Remedies

Research Aim: The hatred, intolerance, prejudice, or hostility towards the religion of Islamic and its followers are termed Islamophobia. In the last few years, the increasing trend of Islamophobia has been witnessed in the Western Countries, which at some instances lead to the act of violence and killing of Muslims, for example, the New Zealand mosque shooting in 2019 where 51 Muslims were shot dead by an Islamophobic was extreme evidence of the existence of Islamophobia. Therefore, in today’s time, when millions of Muslims live in Western Countries, it is essential to identify the causes of increasing Islamophobia and how it can be controlled.

Topic 2: Prevention of blasphemy and its Role in Global Peace

Research Aim: When someone speaks or writes profanely about a sacred or religious personality, place, or object, it amounts to blasphemy. The seculars and proponents of freedom of speech and expression do not hesitate to malign, mock and insult religion and the holy personages. However, blasphemy can enrage thousands and millions of believers worldwide as they cannot tolerate any disrespect towards their religion or holy personages, and they can become violent. In this study, the global blasphemy laws and how much they prevent blasphemy are explored, and their role in developing global peace is explored based on a survey-based study.

Topic 3: Religious Violence and its Association with Religious Intolerance

Research Aim: When religion is a subject or an object of violence, it is categorized as religious violence. In situations where people show no or lack of religious intolerance towards another religion and its followers, they tend to disapprove, criticize, and even use violence to show their dominance. Given this, it is argued that people have intolerance towards another religion, then their intolerance, if it remains unchecks, can even lead to violence. Therefore, this research aims to evaluate religious intolerance’s causal relationship with religious violence to identify if religious intolerance can trigger religious violence.

Topic 4: The notion of Atheism in the modern world. A critical analysis

Research Aim: Atheism is a belief in the non-existence of any God. In the contemporary world, scientific advancements and modern technology have made significant breakthroughs that have unravelled many unexplained phenomena and have consequently changed people’s lives and beliefs. As people’s reliance on science and technology has increased, anything that cannot be proven logically or through scientific evidence is rejected, even if it is God’s existence. In this research past, literature will be critically analyzed to identify what atheism means in today’s modern world and how it has altered people’s beliefs.

Topic 5: An analysis of belief and culture of African Christians in Diaspora.

Research Aim: During recent history, many African Christians have migrated to Western or Developed Countries to save their lives or attain better life prospects and living standards. After living in other Countries, African Christians came into contact with new cultures, traditions, religions, languages, and beliefs, altering their ideas and culture. In this regard, this survey-based study aims to identify whether African Christians have preserved their beliefs and culture while living in Diaspora.

Topic 6: The evolution of religious beliefs in India posts 20th century: A critical analysis.

Research Aim: In this research, the molecular structure of various tumors is discussed along with the therapeutic issues faced for these ailments and their treatments. Target spots for treatment and different chemical mixes for its treatments are also explained in this research.

Topic 7: The inherent belief of all religions lies in following the teachings prescribed by a higher authority. Discuss.

Research Aim: All religions have some guidelines recorded in holy books and religious scriptures that their believers have to follow. Whether obeying a higher authority’s commands is a common notion in all religions is critically discussed by conducting a thematic analysis of past literature.

Topic 8: Religious diversity and terrorism: An empirical analysis.

Research Aim: There are hundreds of religions practised globally that are significantly diversified in terms of beliefs, characteristics, traditions, festivals, and customs. In the past three decades, the increased occurrence of religious-based terrorism worldwide gives rise to a need to explore any causal link present between religious diversity and terrorism.

Topic 9: A Comparative study between Hinduism, Islam, and Christianity

Research Aim: The similarities and differences between Hinduism, Islam and Christianity are compared by conducting a thematic analysis. These religions’ religious scriptures will be discussed and compared to identify the shared characteristics present amongst them.

Topic 10: Why Islam is the Fastest Growing Religion in the World?

Research Aim: Islam has been linked with global terrorism in the media, yet still, it is number one in the list of fastest-growing religions of the world. In this regard, an in-depth exploratory study is to be conducted to identify the underlying reasons. A growing number of people are accepting the religion of Islam.

History and Religion Dissertation Topics

History and religion have been a topic of interest throughout previous decades and gained particular importance amongst researchers focusing on the impact and influence of religion on culture throughout history.

Based on  a literature review of the religious references, the researchers have drawn a connection between literature and culture. History and religion are not confined to the evolution or impact of a particular religion. Still, it goes beyond the diversity of religion and focuses on developing the human race throughout time. Below is a list of suggested topics that can be used for history and religion research dissertations.

Topic 11: The comparative study between ancient Judaism and Hinduism

Research Aim: The similarities present between ancient Judaism and Hinduism are critically reviewed. For instance, both religions have a distinct class system that divides people into superior and lower classes. In Judaism, people are divided into Jews and non-Jews, referred to as gentiles, and as per Judaism, gentiles are animals in human form. Similarly, Hinduism divides people into four classes; Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, and Shudras, where Shudras are given animal status.

Topic 12: How the Renaissance altered Christian religion and beliefs during the 15th and 16th Century Europe

Research Aim: Renaissance was a revolt against the supremacy of Christian theology, pope, the prohibition of learning science and logic, and interference of Church in the personal life of individuals during middle ages starting from 500 to 1400 Century. The renaissance proposed a new idea of humanism where religion must not intervene in an individual’s worldly and religious affairs, and people are free to have their own religion and beliefs. This study will critically analyse how the renaissance impacted the Christian religion and beliefs of European people during the 15th and 16th centuries.

Topic 13: Was Christ really crucified? A critical analysis of the contradictory evidence found in Christian and Islam

Research Aim: As per Christian belief, Jesus Christ was crucified, and he gave his life on the cross so that all Christians can be forgiven for their sins and go to paradise. However, as per Islamic belief, Christ was never crucified. Instead, God ascended Jesus Christ and made the betrayed companion look like Jesus Christ, and the Romans crucified him thinking that he was Jesus Christ.

Topic 14: Illicit affairs between Monks and Nuns in Christian Monasticism, a myth or a reality?

Research Aim: The mass grave of newly born babies found beneath the Catholic Church in Ireland provides evidence to support the myths about secret sex lives of monks and nuns throughout the history of Christian Monasticism. Based on the thematic analysis of the historical evidence found in literature and media, the immorality and hypocrisy of Catholic Monasticism will be critically reviewed.

Topic 15: Historical account of the destruction of Jerusalem and Jewish exile by King Nebuchadnezzar

Research Aim: The King of ancient Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar, had destroyed Jerusalem along with the temple of Solomon and exiled all Jews from Jerusalem in 586 BC. Many Jews were taken to Babylon as slaves, while many were dispersed and wandered in the desert for many years. Thematic analysis will be conducted in this study. The historical evidence found in the past literature will be critically reviewed to understand the Jewish Diaspora and their hardships.

Topic 16: Islam: The religious foundations and evolution through the 7th century into the modern world.

Research Aim: The religion of Islam, which came in the 7th Century in Arab, has spread to every part of the world today. Today more than 350 million Muslims exist and follow the religion of Islam, which was introduced around 1400 years ago. Although they have been divided into different groups and sects, they still share some common fundamental beliefs. Therefore, an exploratory study will be conducted to identify how Islam has evolved and how its religious foundations are compatible with the modern world.

Topic 17: The life of Adolf Hitler: impact of religious doctrine and belief.

Research Aim: Adolf Hitler was born and raised in a Roman Catholic family. As per his public speeches, he considered Jews to be the true enemy of Christianity, and by fighting against them, he was actually doing God’s work. Therefore, a thematic analysis is to be conducted on the life of Adolf Hitler to ascertain whether his religious doctrine and belief impacted his life.

How Can ResearchProspect Help?

ResearchProspect writers can send several custom topic ideas to your email address. Once you have chosen a topic that suits your needs and interests, you can order for our dissertation outline service , which will include a brief introduction to the topic, research questions , literature review , methodology , expected results , and conclusion . The dissertation outline will enable you to review the quality of our work before placing the order for our full dissertation writing service !

Religion and the Contemporary World Dissertation Topics

This theme focuses on topics that analyse the effect of religion within the contemporary world, including the media’s influence and the application of religious beliefs to the modern-day world.

This is an interesting topic for those aiming to look at theology and religion together since the implications of religion to the contemporary world has become the focus of discussion and dichotomy. Below is a list of topics that can be used for Religion and the Contemporary World Research Dissertation purposes.

Topic 18: Islam subjugate or uplift women: A critical analysis

Research Aim: Islam is criticized for women subjugation and inequality. Still, women in Western countries willingly accept Islam and follow Islamic practices such as wearing Hijab and covering their heads and faces. If Islam actually subjugates women, then why are independent and educated women in Western countries like France and the UK becoming Muslim. To unrevealed this mystery, an exploratory study is to be conducted where the women who accepted Islam will be interviewed to find out whether Islam subjugated them or uplift their status.

Topic 19: Religion is redundant in today's contemporary world.

Research Aim: Religion tends to hinder scientific developments because religion does not permit anything in line with religious law and guidelines. Today’s contemporary world can no longer follow any such restrictions, which can become a hurdle in scientific advancements and medical breakthroughs. Besides, nowadays, people use scientific evidence and logic to justify something rather than blindly relying on religious explanations. In view of this, a survey-based study is to be performed to determine whether religion has become unnecessary in today’s modern world.

Topic 20: Religions and faith communities can be a source of social stability and progress in today’s contemporary world.

Research Aim: In today’s socially and economically unstable and uncertain environment, association with religions and faith communities can enable individuals to have social stability and progress. People tend to look after each other in faith communities. For instance, black Church organisations in London provide work, education and training to black Christians. A thematic analysis will be performed in this research to evaluate whether people can gain social security, better work and prospects by being associated with religious communities.

Topic 21: Various religions, including Christianity and Islam, do not recognize the relationship between same-sex genders. Discuss in light of recent legalization and the global evolution for equality of all people.

Research Aim: The recent laws and legalization made to give rights and equality to the LGBL community are legally permitting people of the same sexual orientations to marry or live in relationships as partners. However, various religions like Christianity and Islam does not permit any such relationships and legalizing the same-sex marriage and relationship would create more differences in the society. This study will focus on identifying the in-depth view of Christians and Muslims on same-sex marriages and their likely impact on their rights, belief and practices.

Topic 22: Equality of women is a blessing or a curse?

Research Aim: Women in western countries like America and the UK are given equal rights and responsibilities. In eastern countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, women have lower rights and responsibilities than men. It is argued that when women have equitable rights, they get higher or lower rights than men based on situations. For instance, a woman as a mother has more rights than a man as a father. In view of this, equitable rights give women more privileges as they don’t have to bear the hardships and exploitation. An exploratory study will be conducted in Pakistan to ascertain whether women feel more blessed or cursed by having equality.

Topic 23: The miracle of splitting of the Moon in the light of scientific evidence.

Research Aim: According to the Islamic belief when people of Mecca in Arab asked the Prophet Muhammad to show a miracle if he is actually a messenger of God, then Prophet Muhammad split the moon in two halves with the movement of this index finger and then rejoined them together. In 1969 the photograph of moon taken by NASA spaceship clearly showed the splitting mark on the surface of moon. Modern astronomers also provide scientific evidence to support the splitting of moon. In this research the scientific evidence to support or oppose the splitting of moon will be critically analysed to determine whether moon was splitting actually splitted.

Topic 24: Why religions and faith are gaining popularity in today’s time.

Research Aim: In today’s time when economic and social problems are on rise, it is worth identifying the reasons because of which more and more people are evidently moving towards religions and faith. Therefore a thematic analysis is to be conducted to explore the reasons why people around the world are becoming more religious by demonstrating and practicing their faith.

Topic 25: Eastern religions, especially Islam have suffered greatly post 9/11 in terms of media representation and fair trial. Discuss.

Research Aim: Since the 9/11 terrorist attack, Eastern religions like Sikhism, Hinduism and especially Islam has been suffered greatly as the followers of these religions were perceived terrorists/extremists and were being victimized. The negative portrayal by media created negative image which may have negatively impacted the fair trial of Muslims and followers of other Eastern religions. Therefore an exploratory study is to be conduct to identify the problem which Muslims, Sikhs, and Hindus faced in America after 9/11.

Also Read: Politics Dissertation Topics

Ethics and Religion Dissertation Topics

The notion of ethics in religion encompasses morality and various morality components to apply to modern life and daily situations. Morality and religion have gone hand in hand throughout history, and it has been observed that multiple moral conducts are justified with the notion of religious beliefs.

For researchers who wish to get a deeper understanding of this relationship, below is a list of topics that can be used for dissertation purposes.

Topic 26: Religious beliefs and morality are deeply entrenched within each other. Critically discuss.

Research Aim: The concept of morality is found in every religion. The concept of right and wrong given by religious beliefs and morality are alike. For instance, telling a lie is bad, while speaking the truth is good for both religions and moral values. In this study, the similarities between religious convictions and moral ethics are reviewed to determine whether religious convictions and moral ethics are intertwined.

Topic 27: Military Action: Ethical justification through religion.

Research Aim: When military action is to be taken against a militant group or terrorists, it would be ethically right to do so in self-defence and protect innocent human lives. Because of this, different religions’ ethical justification to justify military action will be critically reviewed in this study.

Topic 28: Ethical egoism and its relation with moral code.

Research Aim: Ethical egoism is a notion which states that people tend to behave morally only if the moral act would maximize their self-interest. However, a moral code is a set of rules that people follow to live a good life, determining their morals and actions. In this study, the relationship between ethical egoism and moral code will be empirically analyzed.

Topic 29: There is no moral code to justify Islamic Terrorism

Research Aim: Islam is a religion that prohibits killing innocent people, and killing of an innocent soul is regarded as killing the whole of humanity. In this study, the Islamic teachings and moral code will be critically analyzed to identify whether the Islamic moral code justifies the Terrorism done by Islam’s followers.

Topic 30: How is morality entrenched within the teachings of Islam?

Research Aim: Morality means the sense of right and wrong or good or bad behaviour. It is claimed that Islam is a religion that is based on goodness, righteousness and teaches to do good in society and be good with everyone. The Islamic teachings will be critically reviewed in this study to determine how it is entrenched with morality.

Topic 31: Human rights and the ethical dichotomy of religious beliefs.

Research Aim: Human rights are based on all human beings’ equality. However, religious beliefs tend to show ethical dichotomy because it divides people’s rights based on believers and non-believers or piety, where the believers or pious people like religious leaders tend to have more rights than the non-believers or followers. This study is important to identify how religious ethics contradiction with human rights.

Topic 32: Situational ethics through religion. Discuss critically the impact of situational ethics in a multi ethnic community.

Research Aim: When an act in a particular context or situation is judged following a religion’s ethical standards, instead of by the usual morality standards, it is referred to as situational ethics through faith. It can be argued, and if everyone starts justifying their unethical acts with situational ethics in a multi-ethnic community, they will be going against usual standards of morality. This research aims to identify the impact of situational ethics through religion on a multi-ethnic community and how it can create chaos and injustice in society.

Religion and Philosophy Dissertation Topics

Religion and philosophy have been going hand in hand throughout history. Philosophy has been used to justify and question God’s supreme power and the fundamentals of religious faith.

The basic premise of philosophy and its application to religion is based on trying to ascertain the existence of religion as a possibility. You can find a topic that interests you from the list of religion and philosophy dissertation topics below.

Topic 33: Relationship between existence of life and existence of God. Critically discuss with examples.

Research Aim: When a small object like a clock can never be made on its own unless someone creates it, then how it is possible that such a big and complex world and life can be created on its own without a creator. Because of this notion, in this research, God’s existence is critically analyzed based on its relationship with the existence of life.

Topic 34: If there is a God, who was he created by? An in-depth analysis based on fundamental religious beliefs

Research Aim: Based on the argument that nothing can be created on its own and there must be a creator for everything, this idea gives rise to a question that if God exists, then who created God. This question will be critically analyzed by reviewing the fundamental religious beliefs found in the religious literature of various religions.

Topic 35: Christianity is actually Paulism: A Critical Review

Research Aim: It is argued that today’s Christianity is not what Jesus Christ taught, but it is the beliefs and doctrines developed based on what Saint Paul wrote and taught about Christ and Christianity. Saint Paul wrote the thirteen books of the New Testament, and scholars believe that Paul’s teachings greatly deviated from the actual teachings of Jesus Christ. In this study, Paul and the contribution of Saint Paul in developing today’s Christianity will be critically reviewed to evaluate the argument.

Topic 36: Life after death and accountability is a necessity to remedy the injustice done in the world.

Research Aim: In this world, many of the times, the wrongdoers get away from punishment and justice is not provided to the innocent victims. Therefore it is essential that in the hereafter, people can be answerable for their good or bad deeds where they cannot get away after doing injustice, and the victims can be compensated. In this research, the justification for life after death is reviewed in line with the world’s injustice.

Topic 37: God is known to be an all loving, all-encompassing being. How can the evil in the world be justified in the face of an omnipotent God?

Research Aim: It is argued that when God is all-loving, and he is present everywhere, how so much evil, violence, and injustice may be possible in his presence, so much evil violence and injustice is possible taking place in the world. Given this statement, this research aims to justify the existence of evil in the world.

Topic 38: If God cannot be seen then it does not prove that he does not exist.

Research Aim: few things in the world cannot be seen or measured, but they exist, such as pain or magic. Based on this notion, it can be argued that it is not sufficient to deny God’s existence if we cannot see him. This research focuses on determining why it is not enough to disprove God’s presence only because he cannot be seen.

Topic 39: God is only a figments of a believer’s imagination. Discuss.

Research Aim: In different religions, God’s idea and characteristics are different. Some worship idols, some worship animals and supernatural beings, while others worship non-living objects like the moon, stars, sun, trees, and fire. Therefore in this research, God as an invention by the imagination of believers will be critically discussed.

Order a Proposal

Worried about your dissertation proposal? Not sure where to start?

• Choose any deadline
• Plagiarism free
• Unlimited free amendments
• Free anti-plagiarism report
• Completed to match exact requirements

Architecture and Religion: Built Heritage Dissertation Topics

Architecture has played an essential role within the religious communities since it provides a tangible component of the community’s belief in substantiating their religious faith.

To understand the true essence of an architectural building within the religious faith, it is essential to look beyond the buildings’ structural aesthetics and understand the deeper engraved intangible value of religious faith that drives the community. Below is a list of topics that might be interesting for architecture and religion-based dissertation.

Topic 40: Architectural buildings such as churches and mosques have great religious significance. Discuss.

Research Aim: Religious architectural buildings like the synagogue, cathedral, church, shrine, temple, and mosques carry unique religious importance because it symbolizes religious history, culture, give exalted appeal and have a great influence on the religious community. In this research, architectural buildings’ religious importance, namely, synagogue, cathedral, church, shrine, temple, and mosques, will be discussed to identify their religious followers’ respective significance.

Topic 41: What are the components of a Church?

Research Aim: A church is a structure used by Christians to carry out their religious activities and worship. Traditionally, its interior is built in the Christian cross’s shape, and its components included; center aisle, alter, bema, and seats. However, the church building may also have a courtyard, apse, and mausoleum. The modern church buildings may have different structures and components. Therefore in this study, the traditional and modern church buildings are compared and contrasted to identify the mandatory components of a Christian Church.

Topic 42: Without religious buildings to substantiate faith, followers would lose their religion. Discuss.

Research Aim: Religious buildings like churches, temples, and mosques are the holy places where religious followers can worship, practise their faiths, and socialize with their fellow believers to substantiate their beliefs. This research aims to discuss whether, in the absence of religious buildings where followers can affirm their faiths, there are chances that they would lose their religion.

Topic 43: How far would you agree with the belief that divine presence can only be felt within religious architectural spaces?

Research Aim: The religious buildings are believed to have a divine presence, and people tend to go to such places so that they can feel that divine presence. Given this, it can be argued that a true believer may not necessarily need to visit a religious building to feel the divine presence. Therefore an exploratory study will be conducted to determine whether it is necessary to visit religious architectural spaces to feel the divine presence.

Topic 44: Demolishing a building that is fundamental to a religious belief is tantamount to disgracing the divine God. Discuss.

Research Aim: Destroying a religious building with significant importance to a religious belief would be equal to disrespecting the divine God and religion. The believers of that religion would not tolerate if their religious building is demolished, and they can react violently and create havoc. Therefore, in this study, what a religious building’s demolition would mean for their religious followers will be evaluated by conducting an in-depth analysis.

Topic 45: What is the purpose of religious architectural buildings? Discuss with a comparative analysis of different religious faiths.

Research Aim: All religious architectural buildings serve one common purpose: to provide a place for the religious followers to worship, congregate, and practice religious activities. However, different religious architectural buildings may also serve different or additional purposes. This study aims to conduct a comparative study between different religions to determine whether all religious architectural buildings serve the same purpose.

Topic 46: An expensive religious building does not encompass the basic human right of equality amongst all mankind. Discuss.

Research Aim: In today’s world where millions of people live below the poverty line, constructing an expensive religious building seems to contradict the notion of equality amongst all humankind and basic human rights. However, it can be argued that the poor people who do not have access to luxuries can avail comfort by visiting the expensive religious building. Therefore it is necessary to determine whether expensive religious buildings give all humankind equality and are in line with human rights. Get Free Custom Dissertation Topic .

Politics and Religion: Dissertation Topics

The study of religion and politics aims to draw an interconnecting relationship between the two subject areas and analyze their impact upon each other’s application. Below is a list of topics that may help aim to research the relationship between  Politics and Religion .

Topic 47: There needs to be clear distinction between political views and religious beliefs. Discuss.

Research Aim: As per secularist ideology, politics and religion are two different aspects and therefore should be clearly separated. However, religious doctrines tend to suggest that politics and religious beliefs go hand in hand. Given this argument, the present study adopts exploratory research to determine whether there must be a clear distinction between political views and religious beliefs.

Topic 48: Politics is used as a mask to cover up religious fanaticism. Critically analyse.

Research Aim: Politics include various activities which are used to govern a country. In a country where the governance is controlled or influenced by religious leaders or religious parties, religious fanaticism may be accepted and cultivated under political authority. In this research, the relationship between politics and religious fanaticism is critically analyzed to identify whether politics is used as a cover to foster religious fanaticism.

Topic 49: The fading association between religion and politics in a secular state.

Research Aim: secularism is a belief which segregates politics and state from religious affairs. Based on this notion, it can be argued that people tend to disassociate religion from worldly affairs in a secular state. Therefore the affiliation between religion and politics has been diminishing. In this study, the relationship between religion and politics is to be determined in a secular state to evaluate the extent to which religion is disassociated from politics.

Topic 50: Should religious leaders be equipped with some form of political or legal authority

Research Aim: Religious leaders have a great degree of power and influence over their religious communities, and their followers tend to obey their orders without questioning them. This shows that religious leaders can even use their position and religious authority to direct their followers wherever they want. Therefore this study focuses to critically analyze whether it would be correct to give religious leaders any political or legal authority.

Topic 51: The only reasons politicians bow to religious authority is to gain popularity. Critically analyse.

Research Aim: In countries where religious leaders have great influence and control over many people, the politicians sometimes join hands with religious leaders to win elections by gaining support from their religious followers. However, the politicians’ collation with the religious leaders may not necessarily mean that they bow down to the religious leaders. Still, it is a diplomatic step to gain their own political authority.

Topic 52: How has the religion Islam succumbed under political pressures? Critically analyse.

Research Aim: In the post 9/11 world, the religion Islam came under immense political pressure. The political activism by Islamic organizations and religious parties has been restricted to moderate the religion of Islam. In this research, a critical analysis is to be conducted to determine whether religion Islam surrendered under political pressures.

Topic 53: The role of Hindu extremists and politicians in Indian society.

Research Aim: In India, the Hindu extremist party RSS played a significant role in rising Hindu Nationalism in Indian politics. Since its independence, India has been identified as a secular state. Still, under the Hindu Nationalist party’s new rule, the Indian political landscape has been altered, and Hinduism dominance is forcefully implemented in Indian society. Given this, the present study aims to evaluate what impact the Hindu extremists and Hindu Nationalist politicians would have on Indian culture in terms of violence and injustice towards low-caste people and Muslims living in India.

Important Notes:

As a student of religion, philosophy and theology looking to get good grades, it is essential to develop new ideas and experiment on existing religion, philosophy and theology theories – i.e., to add value and interest in your research topic.

The field of religion, philosophy and theology is vast and interrelated to many other academic disciplines like  civil engineering ,  construction ,  law , and even  healthcare . That is why it is imperative to create a religion, philosophy and theology dissertation topic that is articular, sound, and actually solves a practical problem that may be rampant in the field.

We can’t stress how important it is to develop a logical research topic; it is based on your entire research. There are several significant downfalls to getting your topic wrong; your supervisor may not be interested in working on it, the topic has no academic credit-ability, the research may not make logical sense, there is a possibility that the study is not viable.

This impacts your time and efforts in  writing your dissertation  as you may end up in the cycle of rejection at the initial stage of the dissertation. That is why we recommend reviewing existing research to develop a topic, taking advice from your supervisor, and even asking for help in this particular stage of your dissertation.

Keeping our advice in mind while developing a research topic will allow you to pick one of the best religion, philosophy, and theology dissertation topics that fulfill your requirement of writing a research paper and adds to the body of knowledge.

Therefore, it is recommended that when finalizing your dissertation topic, you read recently published literature to identify gaps in the research that you may help fill.

Remember- dissertation topics need to be unique, solve an identified problem, be logical, and be practically implemented. Please look at some of our sample religion, philosophy and theology dissertation topics to get an idea for your own dissertation.

How to Structure your Dissertation

A well-structured   dissertation can help students   to achieve a high overall academic grade.

• A Title Page
• Acknowledgements
• Declaration
• Abstract: A summary of the research completed
• Table of Contents
• Introduction : This chapter includes project rationale, research background, key research aims and objectives, and the research problems. An outline of  the structure of a dissertation can also be added to this chapter.
• Literature Review :  This chapter presents relevant theories and frameworks by analyzing published and unpublished literature on the chosen research topic to address  research questions . The purpose is to highlight and discuss the selected research area’s relative weaknesses and strengths while identifying any research gaps. Break down the topic and key terms that can positively impact your dissertation and your tutor.
• Methodology: The  data collection  and  analysis  methods and techniques employed by the researcher are presented in the Methodology chapter, which usually includes  research design,  research philosophy, research limitations, code of conduct, ethical consideration, data collection methods and  data analysis strategy .
• Findings and Analysis: Findings of the research are analyzed in detail under the Findings and Analysis chapter. All key findings/results are outlined in this chapter without interpreting the data or drawing any conclusions. It can be useful to include  graphs ,  charts  and  tables  in this chapter to identify meaningful trends and relationships.
• Discussion and  Conclusion:  The researcher presents his interpretation of the results in this chapter and states whether the research hypothesis has been verified or not. An essential aspect of this section is establishing the link between the results and evidence from the literature. Recommendations with regards to the implications of the findings and directions for the future may also be provided. Finally, a summary of the overall research, along with final judgments, opinions, and comments, must be included in the form of suggestions for improvement.
• References:  Make sure to complete this following your University’s requirements
• Bibliography
• Appendices: Any additional information, diagrams, and graphs used to  complete the dissertation  but not part of the dissertation should be included in the Appendices chapter. Essentially, the purpose is to expand the information/data.

About ResearchProspect Ltd

ResearchProspect is a  UK based academic writing service  which provides help with  Dissertation Proposal Writing ,  Ph.D. Proposal Writing ,  Dissertation Writing ,  Dissertation Editing and Improvement .

Our team of writers  is highly qualified and are experts in their respective fields. They have been working for us for a long time. Thus, they are well aware of the issues and the trends of the subject they specialize in. 

Need more Topics.?

Review Our Best Dissertation Topics 2020 complete list.

Free Dissertation Topic

Phone Number

Academic Level Select Academic Level Undergraduate Graduate PHD

Academic Subject

Area of Research

You May Also Like

Topics for maritime law dissertations include the legalities of ships and other issues in international waters. Due to the importance of global connections and links in this field, marine law.

Looking for a list of the most intriguing dissertation topic ideas on wildlife? Our wildlife dissertation topics are suggested by experts.

Choosing the right Asset Management dissertation topic can be a nightmare for many students. The topic of your dissertation determines how well it ranks. This is due to the fact that your topics are the first thing your readers will notice about your article.

USEFUL LINKS

LEARNING RESOURCES

COMPANY DETAILS

• How It Works

La religion - dissertations de philosophie

• A quoi sert la religion ?
• Croire, est-ce renoncer à savoir ?
• Doit-on considérer la religion comme l'ennemie de la raison ?
• Entre croire et savoir, faut-il choisir ?
• Est-ce faiblesse que de croire ?
• Faut-il aimer son prochain ?
• La foi religieuse exclut-elle tout recours à la raison ?
• La peur gouverne t-elle nos croyances ?
• La raison doit-elle combattre les croyances ?
• La raison peut-elle remplacer la religion ?
• La raison s'oppose t-elle à toutes formes de croyance ?
• La religion et la liberté s’excluent-elles ?
• La religion n'a-t-elle de fonction que sociale ?
• La religion n'est-elle qu'une consolation infantilisante ?
• La religion nourrit-elle l’amour ?

Total Price

Customer Reviews