Introduction
Since the dawn of human civilization, religion has been its integral component. It shaped the mindsets of entire nations, having a direct influence on both global affairs and the everyday activities of the people. The world has always been characterized by an extreme diversity of beliefs: from the pagan pantheons of Ancient Rome and Greece to the global spread of Christianity and Islam. Each religion has its own set of principles, dogmas, and values. In fact, the differences between these aspects have been largely responsible for a range of conflicts across history. Centuries of religious influences have embedded these principles in the cultural code of each nation, often rendering them indistinguishable from secular traditions. In spite of the global religious variety, all beliefs are united by the purpose that they serve within a single civilization. More specifically, the aim of religion is to attribute purpose to a person’s life, expanding one’s understanding of the world that surrounds them.
Furthermore, in the past, religion served to explain a variety of natural phenomena that could not be fathomed by the human mind at the time. This range continued to transform along with the evolution of knowledge, from thunder and lightning to what happened after a person’s death. Nevertheless, a simultaneous process grew in importance, along with knowledge development. Scientific research gradually acquired a role of increasing value within most human civilizations. The development of tools and technology provided civilizations with a deeper appreciation of nature and the universe. Consequently, the phenomena that used to be attributed to the acts of gods have received logical explanations through the laws of physics, chemistry, biology, and other sciences. Thus, a question arose of whether religion merely played the role of a “bad science” placeholder. This paper addresses the eternal clash of scientific and religious perspectives through the lens of creationism and Kuhn’s ideas of paradigm shift.
The Origins and Role of Religion
Unlike scientific research, religion traces its history to the very origins of human civilization, becoming inseparable from the cultural aspects of its development. The universe has always exhibited an array of phenomena that fascinated people and prompted them to guess about the nature of these occurrences. From a psychological perspective, the fear of the unknown is one of the strongest feelings of its kind (Ecklund & Scheitle, 2017). When facing an unfamiliar phenomenon, humans’ natural response consists of seeking an explanation that would enable a better understanding of it. At the dawn of civilization, the range of such phenomena was considerably larger, whereas the degree of scientific knowledge did not suffice to put them in a dimension of reason. This way, the unknown has found a reflection in the religious beliefs of the people, serving the ultimate purpose of ensuring order amid the chaos. For Ancient Greeks, the movement of the Sun was conditioned by the actions of a god named Helios, as they simply did not possess the required astronomical expertise to understand it. These beliefs reflected the worldview of the corresponding civilization, along with their fears and values that could not be explained otherwise.
In later religions, the scope and scale of the unknown became larger, as prompted by the evolution of humanity, its knowledge, and its philosophies. From the regular occurrences of nature, such as volcanoes, thunderstorms, and astronomical observations, the questions became elevated to higher, spiritual domains. The beliefs that persisted through history until the present attempt to provide meaning to major philosophical concerns of humanity (Ecklund & Scheitle, 2017). This list includes the purpose of human life, the distinction between good and evil, as well as post-mortem experiences. The last aspect is particularly important, as the fear of death is inseparable from the fear of the unknown. The end of terrestrial existence is an ultimate milestone for sentient beings such as humans. The minds of the people could not fathom the concept of the absence of cognition and life. Fueled by the sorrow of the living, they sought answers with the only tool that is known to add meaning to the disorder and mystery. Through rituals and traditions, religion brings a sense of understanding to an otherwise uncertain situation.
Transition to Science
On the other hand, civilization has always relied on a crucial dichotomy of science and religion. Along with the evolution of research and methodology tools possessed by humanity, the share of scientific knowledge grew accordingly, replacing the previous religious beliefs. From one perspective, the latter has served to provide meaning in complicated situations that could not be explained with the existing knowledge of its time (Ecklund & Scheitle, 2017). This purpose aligns with the primal fears of indeterminacy embedded in the human psyche.
On the other hand, humans as a species as naturally inquisitive. In other words, it is an inherent feature of the civilization to be willing to utilize the full cognitive potential and venture beyond the current perception of the universe. Adding meaning to the general disorder is a task that can be completed by different means. For the scientific approach, religious perceptions of mysteries as gods’ work are the path of least resistance. Thus, they prefer to operate with facts and knowledge, proving that previously unfathomed occurrences can actually be described within the fundamental laws of the universe (Ecklund & Scheitle, 2017). Logically, as the scientific expertise of humanity grew, so did the role of knowledge, inevitably outweighing religion. However, this process was bound to cause conflict between the logical and the spiritual, which deserves additional exploration.
Kuhn’s Idea of Scientific Revolution and Paradigm Shift
Within the context of the present discussion, it is relevant to address the term “paradigm shift”. This notion was introduced by Thomas Kuhn in the 1960s in a meaningful attempt to describe the scientific perspective on knowledge of the universe (Shin, 2020). More specifically, Kuhn rejected the very idea of the evolution of scientific knowledge toward the discovery of fundamental truths. As per his concept, science is a constant phenomenon that exists within a specific paradigm that corresponds with its timeframe. In turn, the paradigm is the reflection of the current state of research on a specific subject matter. It has its own limitations that are related to the degree to which existing theories explain a phenomenon. Once a better paradigm is introduced, reflecting the truth to a higher degree, a scientific revolution occurs. Its ultimate result consists of a paradigm shift, meaning that a new paradigm is placed until it is rendered obsolete by a subsequent discovery.
In a way, Kuhn’s perspective on scientific development can be applied to the eternal conflict between science and religion. The latter can be perceived as a certain paradigm that reflects the contemporary state of research at the moment of its creation. For example, Ancient Greeks did not have knowledge of atmospheric processes, and their paradigm described lightning as act of Zeus. Once the required research was completed, a better paradigm was proposed, rendering the previous one irrelevant. Thus, from Kuhn’s standpoint, religion can be seen an earlier, incommensurate version of science as a tool to describe the laws of the universe. However, this perspective does not fully illustrate the profound meaning of religion and its high purposes. Modern religions explain more than natural occurrences or the movement of celestial objects. They address the fundamental philosophical questions of truth, virtue, the meaning of life, and death. These matters exist beyond the material plain, and often remain subjective judgments. Thus, Kuhn’s approach to science is only partially applicable it its comparison with religion.
Creationism Perspective
One of the key questions that draw a line between religion and scientific knowledge is related to the origins of life, namely humanity, on Earth. Ruse (1998) argues that creationism cannot be logically viewed as an equal opponent of the scientific paradigm of evolution. According to him, science ensures solid knowledge on the basis of four key concepts that determine it: explanation, prediction, testability, and confirmation. Hence, scientific knowledge profoundly explains the nature of a phenomenon, but it is not limited to it. Following the explanation, scientific knowledge provides sufficient data to make informed predictions regarding the future. Moreover, its information is precise enough to expect an accurate nature of the forecast. Next, the scientific information can be tested through experimental or theoretical replication, thus confirming (or disproving) the paradigm.
In the case of creationism, these principles cannot be applied in their true sense. Ruse (1998) refers to the fundamental works of creationists who willingly admit that God constructed life with the use of the processes that are no longer present in the Universe, nor can they be fathomed by a human mind. This approach undermines the principles of testability, meaning creationists simply state that life appeared this way, but there are no reliable means of testing the hypothesis. With this criterion remaining unmet, creationism does not fall into the category of scientific knowledge. In other words, it does not fit into the paradigm.
Conclusion
Overall, the comparison of science versus religion is an age-old conflict. From one perspective, the dominating role of scientific knowledge can, indeed, be described as a paradigm shift. Earlier religions attempted to explain unfamiliar occurrences with the tools that they had, attributing them to the work of gods. In this regard, Kuhn’s model can be partially applied to the matter at hand. However, the concept of religion is more complex than that, as later beliefs evolved along with the philosophical context of humanity and addressed fundamental issues. Specifically, religions ventured beyond observable phenomena of the universe that remained within the material plain. They then sought to add meaning to eternal concepts that are above material, remaining inconceivable to the human mind. This development reflects the spiritual effect of religion that operates in a territory uncovered by science. In this regard, the two notions of objective exists in parallel domains, covering different aspects of humanity as sentient beings with advanced cognitive skills. Science is responsible for the material, whereas religion addresses spiritual aspects, forming an ultimate unity that separates humans from other species.
References
Ecklund, E. H., & Scheitle, C. P. (2017). Religion vs. Science: What religious people really think. Oxford University Press.
Ruse, M. (1998). Creation science is not science. In M. Curd & J. A. Cover (Eds.), Philosophy of science: The central issues (pp. 38-48). W. W. Norton & Company.
Shin, A. Y. (2020). Paradigm shift. Techniques in Hand & Upper Extremity Surgery, 24(2), 53–54.