How Social and Political Factors Often Situate debates Surrounding Religion and Science

How Social and Political Factors Often Situate debates Surrounding Religion and Science

Introduction

Since the early 1900’s the relationship between science and religions has been studied by philosophers, theologies, and scientists as well. Science and religion have, therefore, been considered as an area of study. The study of religion and science started with scholars who disagreed with the notion that religion and science were indifferent and always at war with each other (Helen 2019). Earlier studies considered the theories and methodology in both disciplines. Later on, however, authors started developing different contextual approaches to the study of religion and science, such as detailed historical relationships between the two fields.

Some early scholars even argued that theological and religious concepts helped give rise to scientific theories. This caused some Christians and revolutionaries to try to reconcile scientific theories with religious beliefs. In attempts to reconcile these two fields, some conferences were held by different bodies from both areas of theology and natural sciences. The meetings had participants from theology, philosophy, and science. The conferences were aimed at understanding divine action in the light of contemporary sciences (Helen 2019). Relations between different religious beliefs and scientific theories were looked into during this conference with an attempt to find out to what extent the two fields were compatible.

In recent decades, religious leaders issued conciliatory public statements on evolutionary theory with some Christian churches endorsing the evolutionary theory. Religion and science have, however, not always agreed for the better part of human history. This is because religion is very diverse. There are various religious affiliations like Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism. Each religion has different interactions with science and therefore harmonizing science with all the religions would be impossible.

The relationship between science and religion has always been a subject of debate in philosophy and theology. To what extent is religion and science compatible? People’s religious beliefs influence their beliefs about science. Religion and science are based on very different aspects of human nature. Science bases explanations on evidence taken from observing and experimenting with the natural world. Observations that do not agree with an explanation have to be modified to fit the explanation or abandoned. Religion, on the other hand, does depend on evidence and usually involves supernatural forces.

Religion and science have historically been viewed as enemies. This notion has been fueled by several past episodes like the theories of Galileo and Darwin, which contradicted the religious establishments at that time, fueling the conflicts between science and religion. The situation has remained the same up to today where modern scientists still remain hostile to religious beliefs. Some scientists, for instance, argue that religion has to be partly blamed for a lot of social ills like ignorance. However, most scientists view the two disciplines as distinct and attempt to answer the differences using different methods that do not conflict the two subjects.

The relationship between these two subjects in the United States seems to be contradictory. Studies show that most Americans have a lot of respect for science due to its contributions to society in terms of technological developments and improvement in the field of medicine. However, the religious beliefs of many Americans still limit their readiness to accept some scientific theories and some scientific research as well. The use of embryonic stem cells for research, for example, is seen as a great advancement in science but religiously it is viewed as the destruction of human life.

Most Americans say that science and religion conflict, while few argue that there do not exist any conflicts between science and religion. Different cultures have different impacts on people’s perception of the conflict between religion and science. People from different social and political backgrounds perceive the conflicts between science and religion differently. Although most Americans agree that religion and science are often in conflict, very few accept that their own beliefs conflict with science. People’s view that there is a conflict between religion and science seems to do with their perception of the beliefs of other people.

Different social and political factors play a different role in the debate surrounding religion and science. The relationship between politics and religion has always been an important theme in political philosophy. Political factors, therefore, have a significant influence on the debate between religion and science. Different social factors also contribute to the development of religious as well as scientific beliefs. Some religious and scientific beliefs are based on people’s socialization and interactions with others. This essay examines how different social and political factors situate debates surrounding religion and science in the U.S.A.

Various social and political factors often situate debates surrounding religion and science in different ways. Social factors have a greater implication on the science-religion debate than political factors. This is because politics and religion are a completely distinct and separate institution in the U.S., and therefore politics has little or no influence on religion. This is however not to say that political factors do not contribute to the debate between religion and science. Although politics in the U.S. tend to not engage in science-religion conflict, the three institutions still overlap, causing a lot of debates.

The fact that most Americans state that they respect science while knowing what scientist belief yet still stick to their religious beliefs and disagree with some fundamental scientific questions is a confusing one. One would ask themselves why this is. The simple answer is that most of the people choose to not believe in scientific discoveries that contradict their religious beliefs and other important beliefs. Over 60% of people say that they would continue to hold on to their religious beliefs even if those beliefs were disapproved by science. Very few would support scientific findings.

Although science and religion do overlap most often, many religious people do not see science as a threat to religion. This may be due to their overreliance on religious faith. This can be argued as ignorance by many people as especially those who argue that scientific advancements do threaten religious beliefs. Religious people will argue that scientific discoveries make them more religious, although it may be highly likely that they only do this to protect their religious beliefs. Less than 5% of religious people say that scientific discoveries and advancements have made them less religious.

The above arguments show that in most of the religious people minds, there is no real clash between religion and science. It is important to note that religious people make up a majority of the population in the U.S. and therefore, correct to argue more than 51% of the people in the U.S. argue the same. Those of believe that the two disciplines are often in conflict see this as mere ignorance and oblivion. The non-religious people argue that when religion and science offer two contradictory explanations, religious people will simply choose to stick to their faith without even considering the facts.

Religious groups also play a major role in the debate on science and religion in the United States. Studies show that white evangelical Protestants, as well as Hispanic Catholics, will be more likely to stay that science and religion are mostly compatible with no constraints existing between them.  However, quite a big percentage of white evangelical Protestants maintain that their own religious beliefs contradict with science. Around 40% of white evangelicals believe that their personal beliefs conflict with science. Very few Hispanics Catholics believe that their beliefs contradict with science.

Religion is often involved in scientific policy decisions. The American people seem to disagree about whether or not religious organizations should be involved in scientific policy debates. Around 54% of the general public thinks that religious organizations should express their opinions on scientific policy debates. 46% of people argue that religious organizations should not get involved in such matters. Most of those who think that religious groups should express their opinions on the matter are those with religious affiliations. People with no religious affiliations maintain that religions should keep out of such issues.

Although people have different opinions regarding the relationship between religion and science, there are very few areas where these opinions are based on personal religious beliefs and practices. Study shows that religious affiliations are the major aspect affecting people’s opinions on the relationship between religion and science. Also, the religious differences of people have no central role in influencing their beliefs about different scientific theories. Research shows that there are numerous influences on the opinions of people about science and religion. Public opinions and beliefs are usually associated with different social and political fact.

Another social factor that situates the debate surrounding religion and science in the United States is education level. It is pretty much a given notion that the more educated a person becomes, the more likely their beliefs in science and religion to change. People with different levels of education often have different understandings of both religious notions and scientific theories (Uecker 2017). The effect of education on religion is not just a simple increase or decrease in one’s faith. However, it impacts on science is quite straightforward.  The more educated one is, the more likely they are to understand the scientific phenomenon.

Education may not necessarily erode a person’s faith in their religion, as many have argued in the past. Some studies have shown that education has a positive effect on people’s emphasis on religion. However, education influences people’s strategies of action, which are relevant to some religious practices and beliefs. This means that more educated people will first establish the facts in a belief or activity before deciding to go by it. Most uneducated people, on the other hand, will follow a belief or practice without question, particularly religious ones.

Educated people will, therefore, acknowledge that there exists a conflict between religion and science. This is because their practice of religion is different from those with lower levels of education and is more open to considering others that conflict their religious beliefs.  Education, for instance, erodes most people’s views that their faith is the one true faith and do not take most teachings literally. They also understand and respect scientific discoveries and acknowledge some of the theories hence recognize the threat science has on religion. Although they may not necessarily abandon their faith, they are likely to substitute their religious belief on a certain issue with a more appealing scientific explanation.

Politics, religion, and science do not often overlap, but when they do, it stirs up a major debate and conflict between religion and science. Political factors through legislation and policy development often contribute to conflicts between religion and science. Policies may sometimes be put in place by the government to support scientific advancement and research. The policies and legislation may, however, go against religious beliefs causing religion to speak against them, causing serious debates on religion and science, and whether religion should be allowed to participate in policy development.

Some of the policies that have stirred the religion-science debate are those set on stem cell research. Embryonic stem cell research, which uses cell derived from human embryos to seek cures for various illnesses, has sparked a major political and moral debate in the United States. Religion and science have taken centre stage in this debate with faithful followers of both disciplines presenting differing arguments in support of their different courses and beliefs. When scientists announced that they had derived life-saving cells from healthy human embryos, it presented a moral and ethical dilemma and heightened conflicts between science and religion.

The government had to develop new policies and regulations on the issue to address the ethical and moral dilemmas presented by the new advancement in scientific research. However, this regulative legislation has not satisfied religious believers of different faiths who argue that the policies allow for the destruction of the human embryo, which is similar to killing (Vestal 2008). Scientists see it as a new path to discoveries for the treatment of many illnesses in the future. The law, therefore, allows for the use of human cells for this research, although it still governs how the embryos are obtained so as to address the moral and ethical issues.

Despite the efforts by the government to develop policies that try to address the ethical issues of stem cell research, opponents still believe that stem cell research still raises moral issues. Religious leaders point out that stem cell research raises the same moral issues as abortion since it involves the destruction of the human embryo. Religious opponents argue that there are other ways that scientists can use to achieve the same promising results that do not involve the destruction use of human embryos (Mohamed 2018). Scientists, on the other hand, maintain that there are not substitutes for the use of embryos in this research.

Also, most scientists argue that the moral issue presented by the opponents is non-existent as the embryos used are very young and hence cannot be perceived as human beings. Furthermore, scientists maintain that the embryos used are derived using methods that are consistent with the law. Different religious groups hold a different opinion. For many Christian groups, life starts at conception, and hence the destruction of the human embryo translates to murder. They state that the embryos have their rights and dignity; therefore their right to life should be respected.

Recently some researchers announced that they had found ways to transform ordinary skin cells into cells with similar characteristics as stem cells. Religious leaders hailed this discovery as it was proof that the destruction of human embryos was unnecessary. The government of the United States acknowledged that the discovery had the potential to end the past debates between religion and science. Scientists were, however, quick to warn that although the discovery presented some hope, it did not guarantee that adult stem cells could produce the same results as embryonic stem cells. They argued that embryonic stem cell research should continue, stirring more debate.

The real debate in the United States arises from the issue of the federal government funding the embryonic stem cell research. Only six states in the U.S. prohibit the creation and destruction of the human embryos for the research. At the national level, most of the politicians are for the federal funding of stem cell research. The federal government only funds and supports the use of embryos that are slated to be discarded from fertility clinics. The funding of embryonic stem cell research sparked a new wave of debate between scientists and religious followers. Religious followers maintained that federal funding of stem cell research was wrong and should be stopped.

This debate has led to medical science playing a role in the United States electoral politics. The issue has in the past had significant impacts in the general elections as well as state elections. In the state of Missouri, voters debated over the issue during the 2006 Senate elections. Voters debated over the issue and in the end, approved a proposed state constitutional amendment that ensured the legality of stem cell research. It was obvious from the debate that those who supported the legalization argued from a scientific point of view while those against it argued from a religious point of view.

While the issue may seem to have elevated the roles that religion and science play in politics and the formation of policies and legislation, it is also correct to say that what it has done more is increase the role that politics play in the debate surrounding religion and science. It is has stirred yet another debate as to which of the two institutions should be more relevant in the issues concerning policy development and implementations. Both sciences and religion have their impacts on policy creation, but when both are involved in the same issue, they end up with conflicting opinions.

Also, other numerous biomedical issues cause differing opinions between religion and science hence raising debates. One such issue is the reduction of serious diseases in babies using genetic modifications. Most American adults who are religiously active are against this practice and maintain that genetic modifications for this purpose are taking scientific and medical advances too far. However, those Americans that are not religiously active say that this practice is appropriate for medical advances.

Political party affiliation also plays a major part in people’s views concerning differing scientific and religious issues (Vestal 2018). For instance, people’s attitudes on the issue of offshore oil drilling are strongly linked to their political party affiliation and ideology rather than their support for scientific or religious ideologies on the same issue. Political factors, therefore, still stir up religious and scientific debates even when those participating in the debate do so solely due to political party affiliations. However, this does not mean that religion and science do not influence politics, as they also have substantial impacts on political factors.

Other areas that political factors influence the debate on religion and science are those of policy development where both fields are of relevance. These include opinions on the regulation of the use of bioengineered artificial organs for human transplant, regulations on the accessibility of experimental drugs before undergoing complete testing, and regulations on the use of genetically modified foods (De Cruz 2017). Long term payoffs from government investments in scientific research which are perceived to involve unethical practices by religious people is also another political factor that stirs up religion and science debates. Some people have argued that religion refuses to stay in its place in society and repeatedly forces itself into the government and other institutions. In that case, it remains a threat to science and scientific advances.

Conclusion

Historically, religious beliefs have always contradicted with scientific theories leading to debates surrounding the two fields. Although both fields are quite independent, they have always overlapped on many occasions stirring conflicts. Religion and science are based on very different aspects of human nature. Science bases explanations on evidence taken from observing and experimentation of the natural world while religion is based on superstitions.

This makes it hard to reconcile the two fields. Social and political factors have a substantial relation to the debates around religion and science, especially on issues concerning the modern-day practice of both fields. With respect to the modern-day practise of science and religion, it is correct to conclude that compatibility of the two fields is impossible as they will continue to contradict more in the future. Scientific advancements will always raise moral issues that will stir debates between the two fields.

References

De Cruz, Helen, “Religion and Science”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2019Edition), Edward.Zalta (ed.), URL=<https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2019/entries/religion-science/>.

Vestal, C. (2008). Stem cell research at the crossroads of religion and politics. Pew Research Center Religion and Public Life, July 17, 2008.

Mohamed, H. S. (2018). Embryonic Politics: Attitudes about Abortion, Stem Cell Research, and IVF. Politics and Religion, 11(3), 459-497.

Uecker, J. E., & Longest, K. C. (2017). Exposure to science, perspectives on science and religion, and religious commitment in young adulthood. Social science research, 65, 145-162.

De Cruz, H. (2017). Religion and science.