1 / 22

Pebble in the Pond: Beginning A Dialogue on Science & Religion

Explore the relationship between science and religion, discussing the potential for dialogue and emphasizing the importance of mutual understanding.

aisha
Télécharger la présentation

Pebble in the Pond: Beginning A Dialogue on Science & Religion

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Pebble in the Pond:Beginning A Dialogue on Science & Religion

  2. Four Contendersin the Fight over theRelationshipbetweenScience & Christianity

  3. Conflict

  4. “So, will science and religion find common ground, or at least agree to divide the fundamentals into mutually exclusive domains? A great many well-meaning scholars believe that such rapprochement is both possible and desirable. A few disagree, and I am one of them.” Prof. Edward O. Wilson

  5. Independent

  6. “The proper relationship between science and religion [is] NOMA, or non-overlapping magisteria. These two domains hold equal worth and necessary status for any complete human life. They remain logically distinct and fully separate in styles of inquiry.” Stephen Jay Gould from Rocks of Ages, p. 58-59

  7. Dialogue

  8. “Dialogue portrays more constructive relationships between science and religion… Dialogue may arise from considering the presuppositions of the scientific enterprise, or from exploring similarities between the methods of science and those of religion, or from analyzing concepts in one field that are analogous to those in the other.” Ian G. Barbour from When Science Meets Religion, p. 23

  9. Integrated

  10. “Many people don’t realize that science basically involves assumptions and faith. But nothing is absolutely proved. Wonderful things in both science and religion come from our efforts based on observations, thoughtful assumptions, faith and logic.” Charles Townes as quoted in USA Today, 3/10/2005

  11. Science Theology

  12. What KIND of Discussion IS This?

  13. “If the universe were just electrons and selfish genes, meaningless tragedies like the crashing of a bus are exactly what we should expect, along with equally meaningless good fortune. Such a universe would be neither evil nor good in intention. In a universe of blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won’t find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice.”

  14. “Whatever this bleak judgement is, it is clearly not a conclusion of science alone. It was not his knowledge of genetics that enabled Richard Dawkins to make this pronounce-ment. Rather, it represents his metaphysical judgement on the significance of the scientific story which is presented to us.” Belief in God in an Age of Science, by John Polkinghorne, p. 12

  15. “If the universe were just electrons and selfish genes, meaningless tragedies like the crashing of a bus are exactly what we should expect, along with equally meaningless good fortune. Such a universe would be neither evil nor good in intention. In a universe of blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won’t find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice.”

  16. “If the universe were just electrons and selfish genes, meaningless tragedies like the crashing of a bus are exactly what we should expect, along with equally meaningless good fortune. Such a universe would be neither evil nor good in intention. In a universe of blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won’t find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice.”

  17. “In freeing our minds from our imagined demigod bondage, even at the price of humility, Darwin turned our attention to the astounding power of the natural creative process and the magnificence of its products: ‘There is grandeur in this view of life.’” Edward O. Wilson again

  18. “In freeing our minds from our imagined demigod bondage, even at the price of humility, Darwin turned our attention to the astounding power of the natural creative process and the magnificence of its products: ‘There is grandeur in this view of life.’” Edward O. Wilson again

  19. “Intelligent design is the scientific theory that observes the natural world and concludes that the diversity and complexity of life on Earth can only be rationally explained by positing a thinking mind behind it all…

  20. “Intelligent design is the scientific theory that observes the natural world and concludes that the diversity and complexity of life on Earth can only be rationally explained by positing a thinking mind behind it all… Complicated biological things ‘give the appearance of being designed for a purpose’ because they were designed for a purpose. This is a possibility that Dawkins and other evolutionists cannot admit-not for scientific reasons-but for philosophical and religious reasons.

  21. “Intelligent design is the scientific theory that observes the natural world and concludes that the diversity and complexity of life on Earth can only be rationally explained by positing a thinking mind behind it all… Complicated biological things ‘give the appearance of being designed for a purpose’ because they were designed for a purpose. This is a possibility that Dawkins and other evolutionists cannot admit-not for scientific reasons-but for philosophical and religious reasons. Evolution and intelligent design represent two radically different world-views.” James Tonkowich in By Faith magazine, issue 7

  22. NEXT TIME How can we carry on this Dialogue / Integration?

More Related