Faith vs. Fact: Why Science and Religion are Incompatible

 This is an op-ed that presents the argument on science and religion in understanding the universe.  The main arguments which Coyne presents are that first, religion and science are incompatible simply because they derive reality and reliability of the universe in different ways and for this reason, they make conflicting conclusions[1]. In other words, he offers argues that incompatibility is due to the fact that science makes conclusion from reason and empirical study while region makes conclusion from faith and revelation. He raises another argument by stating that religion creates hypothesis about the universe by focusing on things which are personally appealing rather than focusing on empirical study[2].   The headlines  supports the main point as the author states that science and religion are incompatible since  science  apply methodology and outcomes in researching the truth while religion focus on faith  where believers present provisional evidences such as  the divine presence[3].

The author uses reliable independent sources where he gathers information from disinterested viewpoint to arrive to a neutral viewpoint.  For example, he presents different thoughts and arguments that help him conclude that science uses straightforward procedures to show the reality while religion is fanatical. Examples of reliable sources in making his argument include ‘A River Runs through It “where he states that faith will help people experience love and create conditions for love[4]. He also states the Darwin’s quote that   in the scientific work; research should not only rely on scientific facts but should also apply scientific fiction[5].  He introduced the issue of global warming and how people   use religions objections and prejudices on social policy issues.

The author places the story in historical contexts where he focuses on evolution, creation adn Christianity.  The historical context and research from different authors strengths his argument on faith and science. The author makes his work transparent as he presents a validation of information and analysis the information effectively making it easier for the reader to understand[6]. He does not only rely on his own thoughts but he presents well-researched arguments based on religion-faith and science.  For example, by quoting Darwin and Neil deGrasse, he presents ascertaining facts from different arguments.  He presents enough information on science and religion and this aid in answering the key questions and arriving to the conclusion[7].  By reviewing both sides, the story is fair since it contains facts, avoids bias, uses reliable sources and ensures transparency.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bibliography

Schloss J.  ‘Faith vs. Fact:’ why religion and science are mutually incompatible. The Washington Post,  2015. Retrieved from: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/science-and-theology/2015/08/03/77136504-19ca-11e5-bd7f-4611a60dd8e5_story.html?utm_term=.acc4de99b817

 

 

[1] Schloss J.  ‘Faith vs. Fact:’ why religion and science are mutually incompatible. The Washington Post,  2015.pg, 1

[2] Ibid

[3] Ibid

[4] Ibid

[5] Ibid

[6]Ibid

[7] Ibid