科学的事实和观点的公众接受程度可能会受到宗教的影响;在美国有许多反对进化论(特别是关于人类)的人。一項2009年由皮尤研究中心做的調查顯示,「幾乎所有的科學家(97%)都認為,人類和其他的動物是透過演化而變成現在的樣子的,87%的科學家認為,這過程是自然發生的,包含了諸如天擇等的過程;然而科學界的主流觀點,也就是生物是透過天擇等過程演化來的這點,並非一般大眾普遍的看法,只有大約三分之一(32%)的民眾相信演化論。」[29]然而美国国家科学院写了这么一句话:"the evidence for evolution can be fully compatible with religious faith,(进化的证据可以与宗教信仰完全相容)"这个观点得到全球许多宗教教派的正式认可。[30] 根據調查顯示,科學家信仰宗教的比例是最低的。皮尤研究中心的一份报告对美国科学促进会成员中的科学家进行了调查,结果发现只有33%的人相信上帝,而普通公众的这一比例为83%。[31]
科学对如何理解宗教经典产生重要影响。 在中世纪,字面理解《圣经》变得普遍,但经过科学学术的挑战后,现今坚持以字面解释《圣经》已经不多见于天主教了。尽管当代的基督教基要主义仍然坚持圣经无误,按字面意义理解《圣经》,但科学推动天主教会修改了主张。1936年,教宗庇护十一世创建宗座科学院, 其目的是促进数学、物理和自然科学的进步以及相关认识论问题的研究。2014年10月28日,教宗方濟各在梵諦岡宗座科学院(Pontifical Academy of Sciences)發表演說,认为人们不应根据《圣经》的字面意义来理解创造过程, 上帝不是魔法師, 認為演化論及大爆炸理論是真實的。 [57]
科学家查尔斯 A. 库尔森和哈罗德·Schilling都認為“科学和宗教的方法有很多共同之处。”[61]
后者称科学与宗教都有三重结构——经验、理论解释和实际应用。[61]库尔森认为“科学像宗教一样受到创造性想象的推动”,“科学不是仅仅收集事实”。他认为宗教应该而且确实“包含了类似于科学中的批判性反思。”宗教语言与科学语言之间也表现有相似性(参见《科学的修辞》)。
也有当代科学史学家不支持冲突学说。[70][71][72][73] 尽管如此,他们也同意科学与宗教主张之间在经验问题上存在冲突。 比如,科学史学家加里·B·费恩格伦(Gary B. Ferngren)同意天主教主张和伽利略主张之间在经验问题上存在冲突,只是不认为这些冲突代表了科学与宗教之间普遍或不可避免的冲突。[70]
^Science in America: Religious Belief and Public Attitudes. (原始内容存档于2010-04-22). a close reading of survey data shows that while large majorities of Americans respect science and scientists, they are not always willing to accept scientific findings that squarely contradict their religious beliefs. Furthermore, where scientific evidence and long-held religious belief come into direct conflict, many Americans reject science in favor of the teachings of their faith tradition.
^Thomas, Hugh M. English Secular Clerics and the Growth of European Intellectual Life in the Twelfth-Century Renaissance. The Secular Clergy in England, 1066–1216. Oxford University Press. 2014-08-14: 227–245. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198702566.003.0010.
^Rüegg, Walter. Foreword. The University as a European Institution. A History of the University in Europe. 1: Universities in the Middle Ages. Cambridge University Press. 1992: XIX–XX. ISBN 0-521-36105-2.
^Grant, E. (12 December 1990). Science and Religion in the Middle Ages. Speech presented at "Science and Religion in the Middle Ages," in Harvard University, Cambridge
^Peter Harrison, 'Religion, the Royal Society, and the Rise of Science', Theology and Science, 6 (2008), 255–71.
^Thomas Sprat, The History of the Royal Society (London, 1667)
^Frank Turner, 'The Victorian Conflict between Science and Religion: A Professional Dimension', Isis, 49 (1978) 356–76.
^ 22.022.122.2Cahan, David (编). From Natural Philosophy to the Sciences: Writing the History of Nineteenth-Century Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 2003. ISBN 978-0-226-08928-7.
^Bertrand Russell, A History of Western Philosophy,. Bruno is one of those heroic figures who have fought for intellectual freedom against the tyranny of authority. His philosophy is interesting as an example of the transition from medieval to modern ways of thinking.
^Committee on Revising Science and Creationism: A view from the National Academy of Sciences and Institute of Medicine of the National Academies. Science, Evolution and Creationism. National Academy of Sciences. 2008 [2015-05-09]. (原始内容存档于2008-09-07).
^Roberts, Jon. Shank, MIchael; Numbers, Ronald; Harrison, Peter , 编. 10. Science and Religion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 2011: 254, 258, 259, 260. ISBN 978-0226317830. Indeed, prior to about the middle of the nineteenth century, the trope "science and religion" was virtually nonexistent.".."In fact, the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries witnessed the creation of what one commentator called "whole libraries" devoted to reconciling religion and science. That estimate is confirmed by the data contained in figures 10.1 and 10.2, which reveal that what started as a trickle of books and articles addressing "science and religion" before 1850 became a torrent in the 1870s." (see Fig. 10.1 and 10.2)
^Bishop, John, "Faith", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2016 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL. [2021-05-19]. (原始内容存档于2021-06-18). ‘Faith’is a broad term, appearing in locutions that express a range of different concepts. At its most general ‘faith’ means much the same as ‘trust’. ... Philosophical accounts are almost exclusively about theistic religious faith—faith in God—and they generally, though not exclusively, deal with faith as understood within the Christian branch of the Abrahamic traditions.
^Stephen Jay Gould. Rocks of Ages: Science and Religion in the fullness of life. Ballantine Books, 1999.
^ 59.059.159.259.3Albert Einstein:Religion and Science. Sacred-texts.com. [2013-06-16]. (原始内容存档于2017-07-03). “ Religion, on the other hand, deals only with evaluations of human thought and action: it cannot justifiably speak of facts and relationships between facts. According to this interpretation the well-known conflicts between religion and science in the past must all be ascribed to a misapprehension of the situation which has been described.”“ a conflict arises when a religious community insists on the absolute truthfulness of all statements recorded in the Bible.”“this is where the struggle of the Church against the doctrines of Galileo and Darwin belongs.”“The main source of the present-day conflicts between the spheres of religion and of science lies in this concept of a personal God.”
^Interview with the Dalai Lama (页面存档备份,存于互联网档案馆), The Progressive (January 2006), scroll to Question: Apart from Buddhism, what are your sources of inspiration? The Dalai Lama: Human values.
^God Delusion Debate (Dawkins – Lennox). [2023-03-07]. (原始内容存档于2023-03-26). having produced some sort of a case for a kind of deistic God perhaps some God would the great physicist who adjusted the laws and constants of the universe that's all very Grand and wonderful and then suddenly we come down to the resurrection of Jesus it's so petty it's so trivial
^The Epistemology of Religious Experience. by Keith Yāndell, New Series, Vol. 104, No. 413 (Jan., 1995), pp. 219-222 (4 pages), Published By: Oxford University Press
^Shapin, S. The Scientific Revolution. University of Chicago Press. 1996: 195. In the late Victorian period it was common to write about the 'warfare between science and religion' and to presume that the two bodies of culture must always have been in conflict. However, it is a very long time since these attitudes have been held by historians of science.
^Ferngren, G.B. Ferngren, G.B. , 编. Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction. Johns Hopkins University Press. 2002: x. ISBN 0-8018-7038-0. ... while [John Hedley] Brooke's view [of a complexity thesis rather than an historical conflict thesis] has gained widespread acceptance among professional historians of science, the traditional view remains strong elsewhere, not least in the popular mind.
^Benagiano, Giuseppe; Carrara, Sabina; Filippi, Valentina; Brosens, Ivo. Condoms, HIV and the Roman Catholic Church. Reproductive BioMedicine Online (Elsevier BV). 2011, 22 (7): 701–709. ISSN 1472-6483. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2011.02.007. Recently, however the Pontiff stated that because the Church considers acts of prostitution and homosexuality to be gravely immoral and disordered, in such specific cases use of a condom might become an initial step in the direction of a moralization leading to an assumption of responsibility and a new awareness of the meaning of sexuality.
^Dawkins, Richard. The God Delusion. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 2008. The presence or absence of a creative super-intelligence is unequivocally a scientific question, even if it is not in practice—or not yet—amenable to scientific resolution. So also is the truth or falsehood of every one of the world's religions.
^Smith, P. A Concise Encyclopedia of the Bahá'í Faith. Oxford, UK: Oneworld Publications. 1999: 306–307. ISBN 1-85168-184-1.
^Mehanian, Courosh; Friberg, Stephen R. Religion and Evolution Reconciled: 'Abdu'l-Bahá's Comments on Evolution. The Journal of Bahá'í studies. 2003, 13 (1–4): 55–93.
^Yong, Amos. (2005) Buddhism and Science: Breaking New Ground (review) Buddhist-Christian Studies - Volume 25, 2005, pp. 176-180
^Kalupahana,David J. (1975) "Causality—the central philosophy of Buddhism" University Press of Hawaii.
^Wallace, B. Alan. (2003) "Buddhism & science: breaking new ground" Columbia University Press, pp 328
参考来源
沙伦·M·P·哈珀 (编). 实验室、庙宇、市场——对科学、宗教和发展的交互作用的反思. 广东人民出版社. 2006. ISBN 7218052193.
The God Delusion Debate (Dawkins – Lennox) (页面存档备份,存于互联网档案馆) (道金斯相信自然法则,否认耶稣复活和神迹;伦诺克斯相信耶稣的复活和奇迹是上帝打破自然法则的能力所证明的。Dawkins believes the law of nature and denies Jesus resurrection and miracles; Lennox believes Jesus resurrection and miracles with justification by God's capability of breaking the law of nature.)