You are viewing a free preview of this lesson.
Subscribe to unlock all 10 lessons in this course and every other course on LearningBro.
The relationship between religion and science is one of the most debated topics in the study of dialogues. For centuries, thinkers have asked whether religious belief and scientific knowledge are fundamentally incompatible, completely separate, or capable of genuine conversation and mutual enrichment. The AQA specification requires you to understand the key models for this relationship, the contributions of major scholars, and the ability to evaluate arguments from multiple perspectives.
Key Definition: Science is a systematic method of inquiry based on observation, hypothesis, experiment, and the formulation of general laws. Religion refers to organised systems of belief, practice, and community centred on the transcendent or sacred.
The most widely used framework for understanding the relationship between religion and science was developed by Ian Barbour (1923-2013) in his landmark work Religion in an Age of Science (1990). Barbour identified four possible models:
| Model | Description | Key Features |
|---|---|---|
| Conflict | Science and religion are fundamentally incompatible | One must triumph over the other; warfare metaphor |
| Independence | Science and religion occupy separate domains | Each has its own methods, questions, and authority |
| Dialogue | Science and religion can engage in constructive conversation | Boundary questions; methodological parallels |
| Integration | Science and religion can be synthesised | Natural theology; process theology; systematic synthesis |
The conflict model holds that science and religion are locked in an inevitable battle. This view was popularised in the 19th century by John William Draper (History of the Conflict between Religion and Science, 1874) and Andrew Dickson White (A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom, 1896). In the contemporary era, the conflict thesis is championed most forcefully by the New Atheists, especially Richard Dawkins (b. 1941).
In The God Delusion (2006), Dawkins argues that religious faith is not only unsupported by evidence but is actively harmful. He claims that a universe with a God would look fundamentally different from one without, and that science provides all the explanations we need for the existence and complexity of life. Dawkins describes religious belief as a "virus of the mind" and argues that evolution by natural selection removes any need for a divine designer.
The independence model asserts that science and religion address entirely different questions and therefore cannot conflict. Stephen Jay Gould (1941-2002) expressed this in his concept of Non-Overlapping Magisteria (NOMA): science deals with factual matters about the natural world, while religion addresses questions of meaning, purpose, and moral value. On this view, conflict arises only when one side oversteps its proper domain.
Key Definition: NOMA (Non-Overlapping Magisteria) — the principle, proposed by Stephen Jay Gould, that science and religion each have a legitimate domain of teaching authority, and these domains do not overlap.
Evaluation: NOMA has been criticised for being too neat. Many religious traditions make factual claims about the world (e.g., miracles, creation, resurrection), and many scientific findings have implications for questions of meaning and value. Dawkins argues that NOMA gives religion an undeserved "free pass" from scrutiny.
Barbour's dialogue model suggests that science and religion can engage in genuine conversation, especially at boundary questions — areas where the two disciplines naturally meet. For example, the question "Why is there something rather than nothing?" is raised by cosmology but has clear philosophical and theological dimensions.
John Polkinghorne (1930-2021), a physicist and Anglican priest, is one of the foremost advocates of dialogue. In works such as Science and Theology (1998) and Belief in God in an Age of Science (1998), Polkinghorne argued that both science and theology are seeking truth about reality, using different but complementary methods. He coined the term "critical realism" to describe the shared commitment of science and theology to discovering the way things really are, while acknowledging that all knowledge is partial and revisable.
The integration model goes further than dialogue, seeking to bring science and religion into a unified framework. Natural theology — the attempt to infer the existence and attributes of God from the natural world — is one form of integration. Another is process theology, drawing on the philosophy of A.N. Whitehead (1861-1947), which sees God and the world as interrelated, with God's creative activity expressed through natural processes including evolution.
The discovery of the Big Bang in the 20th century raised profound questions about the relationship between cosmology and theology.
Georges Lemaitre (1894-1966), a Belgian Catholic priest and physicist, first proposed the "primeval atom" hypothesis (later known as the Big Bang). Some theists have argued that the Big Bang is consistent with the doctrine of creatio ex nihilo (creation out of nothing), since it implies that the universe had a definite beginning.
However, many scientists caution against using the Big Bang as evidence for God. Stephen Hawking (1942-2018) argued in A Brief History of Time (1988) that, if we adopt quantum cosmology, the universe may have no boundary or beginning in the conventional sense, removing the need for a creator.
Exam Tip: Avoid claiming that the Big Bang "proves" or "disproves" God. The strongest answers explore how the Big Bang is interpreted differently by theists, atheists, and agnostics.
Charles Darwin's (1809-1882) theory of evolution by natural selection, published in On the Origin of Species (1859), is often seen as the greatest challenge to the argument from design. William Paley's (1743-1805) famous watchmaker analogy had argued that the complexity of living organisms implies a divine designer. Darwin showed that natural selection — a blind, undirected process — could produce the appearance of design without any designer.
Dawkins develops this argument in The Blind Watchmaker (1986), concluding that evolution provides a complete, naturalistic explanation for biological complexity. He describes natural selection as "the only known force capable of generating organised complexity from nothing."
However, many religious thinkers have accepted evolution as entirely compatible with belief in God. Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955), a Jesuit palaeontologist, argued that evolution is the mechanism through which God creates, and that the universe is evolving towards an "Omega Point" of ultimate spiritual fulfilment. The Catholic Church officially accepts evolution as consistent with faith, provided that the creation of the human soul is attributed to God.
The Intelligent Design (ID) movement, associated with Michael Behe (b. 1952) and William Dembski (b. 1960), argues that certain biological structures (e.g., the bacterial flagellum) exhibit "irreducible complexity" — they cannot have evolved gradually because they require all their parts to function. ID proponents claim this points to an intelligent designer, though they officially do not identify the designer as God.
| Position | Key Claim | Key Scholar |
|---|---|---|
| Neo-Darwinian atheism | Evolution removes the need for God | Dawkins |
| Theistic evolution | God works through evolution | Teilhard de Chardin, Polkinghorne |
| Intelligent Design | Some features require a designer | Behe, Dembski |
| Young Earth Creationism | Genesis is literally true | Henry Morris |
Evaluation: The scientific community overwhelmingly rejects ID as pseudoscience. In the Kitzmiller v. Dover court case (2005), a US federal judge ruled that ID is a form of religious creationism and cannot be taught as science. Critics argue that "irreducible complexity" is simply a gap in current knowledge, not evidence for design.
The trial of Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) is frequently cited as the defining example of conflict between science and religion. In 1633, the Roman Inquisition condemned Galileo for advocating the heliocentric model of the solar system (that the Earth orbits the Sun), which appeared to contradict Scripture.
However, historians caution against simplistic readings. The Galileo affair involved complex political, personal, and institutional factors. Galileo had powerful allies within the Church, and many churchmen were sympathetic to heliocentrism. In 1992, Pope John Paul II officially acknowledged that the Church had erred in condemning Galileo, and praised him as a sincere believer.
Strengths of the dialogue/integration approach:
Limitations:
Exam Tip: In a 25-mark essay, aim to cover at least three of Barbour's four models, use named scholars and dates, and reach a reasoned personal conclusion. The examiner rewards sustained critical evaluation, not just description.