Science and Religion- Additional Resources (Supplementary)

Science and Religion- Additional Resources

Science is defined as “the observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.” Science is a method that mankind can use to gain a greater understanding of the natural universe. It is a search for knowledge through observation. Advances in science demonstrate the reach of human logic and imagination. However, a Christian’s belief in science should never be like our belief in God. A Christian can have faith in God and respect for science, as long as we remember which is perfect and which is not.

Mikeal Stenmark wrote a book, 'How to relate science and religion: A multi-dimensional model' and points an exciting way forward in the effort to reconcile what are arguably the two most powerful cultural forces of our time. Stenmark succinctly lays out the central issues of the debate and shows what is at stake for the nature and advancement of human knowledge. The outcome of Stenmark's work is the construction of a "multidimensional model" of science and religion that refuses to automatically prioritize either. Stenmark shows the ongoing though shifting value of both science and religion played out as a dynamic, evolving relationship.

Oxford handbook Science and religion Cambridge companion Science and religion

Albert Memmi in his book 'Colonizer and the Colonized' strongly argues that, in every colonies, coloniser is always privilege. In the same way he pointed out the relation between Science and the Christian faith.

1.   Christianity has some extended helped to science

2.   Quiet of them are believe in God

In Dictionary of Sociology, Science does not need religion and religion does not need science but human beings need both.

1.   In our fellow human being

2.   World is important and it is real.

3.   Bible is the experience of the early church people. The book of nature is another way of exploring God.

Christin fulfilment is body mind and soul.

Myths and Facts in Historical Encounters with Science and Christin faith

a.    Dissection of dead bodies

b.   Earth as flat

c.    Galileo was the conflicts of science and religion

d.   Darwin and church

e.    Scientific method and end

f.     Religion and the rise of technology

Christianity give birth to science. It is also myth.

Science Vs. religion

Darwin, Galileo, Copernicus.

Science together with for enlightens. Science is 500 years old.

1.   Most of scientist were believers

2.   Christianity significantly to develop the Science. (Christianity is not giving birth to science but Science is influenced by Christianity)

God:

1.   We find God Primarily in the fellow human person. Christian experience is to finding God in our fellow human being.

2.   World is important because it is real and secrete to us.

3.   Through nature also we can find God. Experience of the early Christian community.

The popular Myths

1.   The Christian fulfillment is my soul, body and every together.

2.   Hell-

3.   Religion is not saving our soul.

• Galileo
• Darwin and the church
• Christianity gives birth to science
• Scientific methods and the end of the esoteric group
• Rosicrucian

Science and religion

The 13^th the theology and the religions are known as “Queen” of science. Theology provide the basic knowledge and principle to universal. Because the theology knowledge comes from God. Therefore whatever theology said that is right.

During the time of renaissance period. 12^th to 14^th century. During the time of Nicience scientific invention and discoveries changed the status and meaning of science. No precise measurement are not possible in religious time.

• Science public testing is possible. Religion no public testing.
• Science there is possible for Equation to predict the event. In religion no Equation to predict the event.
• Question the status of religion

Thomas Torrance:

“In natural science interrogative form of enquiry is spoken of as discovery. In theology is spoken as revelation.”

John Polkinghone:

Though religion does not have empirical testing like physical science theology comes out of a kind of empiricism: experience of human being.

Skepticism: Enlightenments period 18^th and 19^th century: the philosophical movement:

Enlightenment period means age of reasons. Skepticism simply means doubtful attitude. Skepticism argued that certain knowledge is impassible. Truth is not actual. Skepticism created some kind of Skeptical attitude among the people. The result was people started to doubt and started to questions.

Reason and scientific thinking, challenge and Christian faith. They were attempt to interpret in the scientific invention.

Creationism- everything was created by God.

• -religious belief and everything came by natural process.
• -It support the theistic creation

Biblical literalism

Creationism:

It rejects that everything was created through natural process.

It supports theistic creationism.

Two types of creationism/ two movements emerged to counter the creationism.

1.   Young earth creationism: the whole earth was created within ten thousand years in six days of 24 hours. The valid proof for them is ‘Noah flood’, somebody has created the earth. Based on fossil record

2.   Old earth creationism: God created this universe over the long over period. The earth is 13.7 million years old.

Similarities:

1.   Both views accepts that God is the creator.

2.   Historicity of creation

3.   Both rejects the evaluation theory.

Two types of creationism

1.   Young earth creationism: God have role in universal

God is the creators of all universe. The whole earth was created with 10000 years within the 6 days of 24 hours. NOAH flood is the proof of young earth creationism. (Noah is the historical event)

2.   Old earth creationism: God does not have any role in universal

God created all the earth over a long period of time. Scientific argue that earth was created 13.7 millions of year old. The old earth creationism go with the scientific invention.

What are the similarity between young earth creationism and old earth creationism?

a.    Both views accept that God is the creator

b.   Historicity of creation story- both accept the fact that creation is the historical story

c.    Both reject the evaluation

d.   Young earth creationism argue that the day gen 1 and 2 refers to 24 hrs.

Old earth creationism: a day means not 24 hours. P: 19:14, Heb: 1 and 2. II peter: 3:8. Gen 2:4

What is Atheist view?

• It mainly focused on scientism
• Scientism- is the view that scientific method and scientific observation are real.
• Religious views and religious argument are not scientific real.
• They not accept that god does not create the universe but it is the natural process.
• Mind and conscious is not a product come from, God but it is the function of Brain.
• God is not creator

Intelligent Design:

William Paley an English theologian. His book natural theology 1802.he argue that god is the creator of the universe. He took an example of watch. Watch to explain the intelligent design. Some has made it. Same like this universe also made by the designer. That designer is none other than God. Therefore, nothing is by chance but some kind of intentional act behind every action.

The doctrine of creation:

Genesis 1 and 2. Two ideas about creation.

1.   Creation out of nothing (Creation Ex nihilo)

2.   Creation as ordering

a.    Creation is an imposition of order based on biblical passages. (Gen: 42:7, 15. 29:16. 44:8.18:1-6)

b.    

Theophilus of Antioch and Justin Martyr: creation is not exnihilo but creation was an act of construction. They were influenced by Greek philosophy. Greek philosophy never consider God as the creator.

Church father Irenics and Tertullian: God is the created and the creation is dependent on god for survival. So God is Author of Evil. Because God created out of nothing. Therefore God created the evil. So they say creation was construction. They were influenced by Greek philosophy. Greek philosophy never considered God is the creator. Mater was pre-existed reality and they don’t use the word God. Architect ordered the pre-existent mater.

Biblical version of creation

Biblical creation in the light of scientific source of theory:

Evolution theory: Charles Darwin. All living organism only through mechanism of natural selection.  

1.   Natural selection: A Random genetic changes voker within and organism genetic cod. Beneficial changes are preserved because they need to be survey. This closes known as natural changes.

Everything was simply evolved.

2.   The complex creatures evolved from more simple creatures

3.   All lives is related because all organism are related to single

Big Bang Theory:

1.   All matter of the universe of concentrated as a single hot Fire Ball.

2.   And explosion about 20 million ago and this matter was broken into different pieces and those pieces are galaxy.

Classical Christian theologians argued that:

1.   If at all there was mater in the beginning, who is the creator of that mater. So God is the creator of the mater.

John B. Cobb junior and David R. Griffin: they argued that, these theories do not excluded God from the creation or the evolution. God is the source of novelty and order.

Pierre Ateilhard Chadin: whole universe is the state of evolution. God is immanent within the process of evolution. God is guiding the universe it was final convergence at omega point. Evolutionary process finally ascend into union with God.

Karl Barth: he argues that creation is the theological event, which cannot be interpreted in the light of natural science.

Wolfhat Pannenber: natural science can illuminate upon the Christin understanding of creation.

Genesis as ancient cosmogony (story):

Biblical is one of the ancient cosmogony story. But we cannot claim that creation is the first. Martin Noth argued that biblical history was written during the time of Babylonian exile. Biblical creation story was very much influenced by Babylonian, Egyptian creation stories. One example is Enuma Elish is the Babylonian creation story. Conrod hyers: biblical stories not a natural history but it is cosmogony.

John Walton: six days of creation were no about the material creation but they were about function. For example sun and moon are, to provide the function of calendar.

Evolution Theory:

Does not allowed one man and one woman. Evolution is happened in many organism.

1.   Historical Adam is not possible

2.   Evolution theory does not accept one man and one woman

God of the gaps and Reductionism

Science can be explanation about physical nature in different dimension. At the same time science also so gives explanation about the physical world. There are areas science cannot explain. There are certain gap in the scientific explanation about the universe. The theologian and scholars filled the gaps with God.

Super natural about physical:

God created

Henry Drummond: God of Gap to criticize the Christian who fill the gap created by scientific explanation. Biblical god is not the God of the gaps but the whole universe is creation is the work of eminent God.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer: We are to find God if what we know, not in what we do not know; God wants us to realise his presence not in unsolved problems but those are solved.

Francis Collins: Intelligent design is guilty of God of the gaps when naturalist evolution face to explain something it is best explained by intelligent design.

It provides less room for God in this universe.

It denies the Omnipresence of God.

As science and advances, the gaps will be reduced in this universe.

Science and Religion Dialogue

Book: Ian Barbour: Religion in an age of science

1.   Conflict: Science and religion are mutually exclusive, their world views, conclusion are antithetical. For Example: Creationist argued that scientific theory are false. Evolutionist argued that biblical creation is not scientific. Scientific materialism argued that matter and energy are only fundamental physical reality. Scientific knowledge is the reliable knowledge. Biblical literalism says that bible does not any mistake.

2.   Independent: both disciplines has contrasting method and different language. Both disciplines are independent autonomous and separate. Any attempt to relate or integrate science and religion actually violate the integrate of discipline. Religion well tell us why and evolution will tell us how the creation is. Both do not work within the boundaries. The problem is they try to cross each other. Compartmentalization of science and religion is not always possible as we think.

3.   Dialogue: Science and religion are Dialogue. There are areas science and religion can meet and enter into Dialogue. Scientist teach how physical body function. But the religion may not be tell us. Geneticist how genes works. Ethical theologian tell us how to genetic (Knowledge). It is not easy science and religion into the table of Dialogue

4.   Integration: both science and religion can contribute one another views, understanding, thinking and perspective. To integrate the biblical knowledge and scientific knowledge. Chardin is the one he say God in the process of evolution.

Ted Peters: Eight categories the relationship between science and religion:

1.   Scientism: science has the monopoly on knowledge about nature. Religion provides a pseudo. Religion provides knowledge about non-existence beings or some fictions or some stories. Fred hoyle says that “Jews and Christian religion tradition has become outdated because of model science”. Scientism is always intolerable knowledge of religion.

2.   Scientific imperialism: argue that existence of so called divine. Scientific imperialism plays that the knowledge of divine reality basically come from the knowledge of scientific research. Scientific knowledge is superior to divine revelation. Frank Tiplar says “quantum theory combined with big bank cosmology and thermodynamic can provide a better explanation than Christianity for the future resurrection of the dead”. Theology should become a brand of physics. Divine knowledge is comes from the scientific knowledge.

3.   Ecclesiastical Authoritarianism: Till Vatican II, 1962. Church is the custodian of every knowledge including science. Church has authority over science. After Vatican II church come to point that religion and science are two autonomous discipline.

4.   Scientific creationism: attempts to connect geological data and biblical data with biblical truth. The biblical truth and scientific truth belong to same thing. Scientific creationism says that, Creation of the world out of nothing.

5.   Two language theory: basically argued that science and religion provides different direction. Science direct toward physical world religion direct towards God/spiritual world. Both disciplines are sovereign territory. Abert Emsteen says that, “science without religion is lame and the religion without science blank”. Science can only ascertain what is, but not what should be. Religion on the other hand deals only with evolution of human thought and action. Langdon Gilkey says that, science has how? And religion ask why?

6.   Hypothetical consonance (accord): Ernan McMullin says that, there are areas where there is a correspondence between science and religion. Correspondence can be made between what can set scientific about natural world. In other words science and religion can bring together. The God question about nature can be honestly asked within scientific reason. Theologian and scientist basically share common subject matter. There are possibility of dialogue. Theologian and scientist should subject there finding or assumption for further explanation or conformation. Openness to learning is the value which theologian and scientist have to follow the result is peace.

7.   Ethical Overlap: Scientific invention basically lots of ethical challenges. Ethical challenges are not address.

8.   New age spirituality: attempt to use spirituality in science and religion. No dualism, there is no split between ideas and skills. David Bohn- explicit order of things that we aspect as the natural  world and that is studied in laboratories is not the fundamental reality, there is under and behind it and implicate order a realm of undivided wholeness. Reality is in flowing movement. The new age spirituality seek to cultivate the awareness of these underline and continually changing unity.

Book: Stenmark- How to relate science and religion: A multi-dimensional model:

1.   Conservative or reconciliation model: science should change its content and the tradition Christian faith is very extent as it. Charistian faith is right science should change.

2.   Traditional reconciliation model: science has to change some of its content at the same time religion also change some of its content. But not fully.

Three Views

1.   The independence view: there is or should be nor overlap/intersect between science and religion.

2.   Contact view: there is, there can be and there should be intersect between science and religion.

3.   Monist View: there can be a union of the domains of science and religion.

The moral: Multi-dimensional moral: own view

Two premises

1.   There is nothing in the domains of the science that is not domains of the religion. And vice-versa.

2.   Science and religion are social practices: both can understand each other.

What is the multi-dimensional model?

We have to go beyond one dimensional picture of science and religion

1.   Social dimension: science and religion are performed by people in co-operation within a particular historical and cultural setting.

What is the meaning of practices?

Practices is a set off complex and fairly, coherent socially established co-operative human activities through which its practitioners try to obtain certain goals by means of particular strategies.

2.   Teleological dimension: we need to see the goals of scientific and religious practices.

3.   Epistemological/Methodological dimension: we need to see the method and developed to achieve science and religion.

4.   Theoretical dimension: We may try to understand the believes, the story and theory developed by science and religion

5.   Since science and religion are social practices, they are subject to change.

Science and Miracles

Christian faith basically affirms and support of the Miracles. Bible prostrates God who is powerful at the same time he is the person. At the same time God is the one who do Miracles.

Bible also talk about the false Miracles and true Miracles. Miracles can be extra-ordinary act of God in physical. The Miracles are religious in nature.

Rene Latoune: A true Miracles is a religious wonder that express in the cosmic order, a special and utterly free action of God.

Different churches understanding

1.   The catholic tradition Miracles are the signs of holiness.

2.   During the reformation period: John calvin and Roman Catholic. Roman Catholic No Miracles happened among the protestant people. We are not preaching in the new gospel that the reason the Miracles are happened in the life. The ages of Miracles can be only happened in the revelation period.

3.   Protestant: people says that Miracles is the acts of providence. Means action of God through natural order. Miracle is the acts of God, disciples. But the miracles is the acts of providence. But they claim that Miracles can be only performs by the God.

Main Arguments

Miracles are objective and the act of providence are subjective.

The 1^st debate happened in the 19^th century.

James B Mozleo: He argues Miracles are special providences or possible because God is a moral being actively involved in physical being.

John Tyndall: He argues how we can say that Miracles events being know that it was performed by God.

J.S. Mill: Miracles can be satisfactorily testified by our senses or by a testimony.

Apart from two thing nothing can be a Miracles.

Fredric Temple: science can never in its character of science admit that a Miracles has happened.

Frances Yattors- there is no evidence/relationship between prayer and Miracle

John and Henrry Thompson- trial hospital- he argue that people were healed not because of prayer but medicine.

R.F. Littledate- Change the venue of trial, from hospital to faith community.

Why we are not able to prove science or Miracle?

Scientist do not see any reality outside of scientific theory. In other word scientist always see inside the scientific theory.

Scientist always see the reductionist methodology. Try to reduce all realities/ Miracles/power of God to particular thing.

Scientist always value Knowable universe and try to know universe more and more.

How God can be active in universe without disturbing the normal or natural pattern of physical world? Christian believe that God is always participate in the universe.

Miracles are a violation of law.

J.L. Maki- Vocational violation of natural law does not over throw the loss of nature.

Robert Russel- God’s action or miracles does not break the laws of nature. God’s action works within in the limits of natural law but it is hidden from scientific analysis. I.e. scientific analysis may not be bring out the all the God’s action.

John Polkinghorne- the scientific and mathematical equation are basically ideal representation of reality. Reality or physical reality is more flexible or open structure. From scientific point of view even the initial beginning body is still unknown.

What is the alternative?

Lidiya Jaeger- Natural world is basically God’s creation Miracles are possible. This is the starting point of God’s action. In God’s providential action, the laws of nature or description of God’s continuing faithfulness of creation.

Eastern theological tradition

In eastern theological tradition there is no separation between natural and supernatural. They believes that the immense of God’s in creation, and the function and working of Nature is God’s creation. In other word what are changes happened in nature is the God’s action.

Kallistos ware- creation is not something upon which god acts from the exterior, but something through which he express himself within (the creation).

Christopher Knight- Miraculous is not the result of something being added to the world. It is a rather a wiping away from that world of the grime of its fallen state, in order to reviled it in its pristine splendour.

• Miracles is a reality because scientific explanation are not always precise and comprehensive.
• Miracles is within natural order though common mind may not be able to explain.
• Redefining miracles- miracles is the providential action of God, within the possibility of natural order.

Post-colonial critique and Eurocentric Science

Post- colonial is a condition of a period after colonialism. It also refers to a theory and which refers an attitude of position with de-centralised with the Euro-centrism.

Post- colonialism argue that Euro-centrism is not the best.

Post- colonialism basically means perspective which explore/highlights the potential of colonialized. Looking at the reality through the eyes of colonialized.

1.   Post- colonial critique argues that science is multi-faceted socially form embodied knowledge.

2.   Science and technology where integral part of civilising machine of Europe. In other words, Science and technology Dominate and control the colonialized. This modern science was a partner of colonialized.

3.   Some tools:

1.   Medicine- was the one of the tools of colonisation.

2.   Steam ships

3.   Guns

4.   Different crops and plants.

4.   Modern European science always ignore the local knowledge. And this modern science actually destroy the local knowledge system. Modern science and technology basically destroy our knowledge system and expanded the boundaries of their empire.

Joseph Neodham_ Scientific contribution to military, factory, industry, railways, etc.

Sasitharu- Book_ in Glories Empire- the British Empire louted our resources with all the sophisticated methods and equipment.

K.S. RathaKrishna- the statement of Lord Macaulay_ India had no science to worthy to be taught in school or college.

Vergirius Xaxa- the introduction of euro centric communication facilities and transportation basically affected the life of tribal people.

1.   It allowed The entry of non-tribal into tribal light

2.   Disposes of tribal lad and tribal resources

3.   Factory based production let to the large scale exploitation of mineral resources particularly tribal.

4.   Euro centric came and encourage to tribal to cultivate the crops which really need. (shifting cultivation)

Frantz Fanon- Settlers used gun to control the colonist. This gun culture made the colonist violent.

Nelson Mandela- “we are soldiers who will never fight for we have no weapons to fight with”

Desmond Tutio- “we had land after becoming Christians, we have the bible, they have land”.

Albert Memmi-Book_ colonies and coloniser_ in every colonies, coloniser is always privilege.

Feminist critique on Science

Euro- centric science is basically man centric science.

Feminist critique on science, exposed the male centre of the science. Women are almost completely excludes the science.

Evelyn Fox Keller and Ruth Hubband- Women are excluded from scientific institution and women participation are very less in scientific invention and scientific project. Most of the scientific studies are man centre. In the past women are excluded from higher education.

Edward Clark in 1873- women would ruin their help if they go to college. It will also to damage

The western society also thinking that women are not capable therefore, they cannot do scientific invention.

Where were women in scientific studies? Where is women voice?

Sandra Handiy- while accepting the utility and value of scientific endeavour, scientific judgement are not uninfluenced by cultural, individual, values and beliefs.

Viginia Woolf- science is not sexless he is a man, a father.

They question objectivity. They argue against one perspective and one value.

It is the myths that women are unfit for science.

Why scientific jobs are given only men rather than women?

The ideologies or theories that project women as inferior or emotional.

David Noble- in the middle ages clericalism envisioned and attempt to maintain a society without women. Though in the 19^th century women were able to enter into academia, they have to face another clericalism that is a male scientific professionalism.

Eco feminist scholar- modern science and technology to dominate women

Vandhana Siva- nature and women suffer because of modern scientific and technological invention.

Marya Mies- women and nature become an object of experiment.

Indian Christian contribution to science and religion

Book: Kuruvilla Pandikkattu- ever approachable, never attainable- read chap 1 and 3

Three main challenges that face science and religion interaction

1.   The divine between religion and science in freeing ideas. There is no need for dialogue.

1.   Religious elements are involved in Indian science. Ex. Ayurveda.

2.   Science has nothing to offer which Indian religion have not discover.

3.   Dualistic view holds that religion and science are two independent domain which cannot interact. Dualistic view science and religion are different.

Ex. For Indian realm of ultimate reality Paramarthika and other realm is practical level vyavabarika

Both science and religion are at the service of humanity. For him nurturing life is the starting point between science and religion interaction.

Kuruvilla arguments:

• He says that, religion can teach humanity about basic value of life.
• Science can make human life easier.

Why should we need Science and Religion? (Kuruvilla)

1.   Science and Religion can help us a renewed vision of God and human.

2.   Science and Religion interaction can go beyond absolutisation and redaction. Religion can teaches the value of human life. Science and Religion helps us to know that what we know about Science and Religion.

3.   Dealing the spirit and body respectful. Soul is fact and soul is precious. Matter and soul is integral part of reality.

4.   Learning respecting the autonomy of both discipline.

Four main values of Science and Religion

1.   Acknowledge

2.   Accommodate

3.   Accept each other

4.   Affirms each other

Key movements a Science and Religion dialogue

1.   Admire: the arguments of science.

2.   Advice:

3.   Admonish: to correct

4.   Advance: move forward

Job Kozhamsthadam- Science and religion dialogue, challenge and opportunities

Science and religion are two living dynamic discipline. Therefore, they cannot remain the same. Science and religion are subject to change. This change can happen through meaningful and. This relationship or dialogical relationship can take these two discipline into another level of new experiment and producing new knowledge.

Both Science and religion is brought for the betterment of human being.

While engaging the dialogue both Science and religion must be aware of their limitation.

Many Jesuit missionary and protestant missionary were not simply missionary, there were also scientist. 52 plants are named after Jesuit missionary

William carry- Botany and agriculture-1^st person who published first scientific text book in India. He is basically scientist.

John Mack- he was accomplished chemical science.

These missionary never felt that science is an enemy of religion.

Agriculture research was one of the interesting area of result of their pastoral concerns.

Allahabad agricultural institute

P. Chenchiah- He revels by creation… God sense atom, but does not sent with it a treatise on physics and chemistry.

In Jesus creation a mounts a steps higher… it is not the pre-existence of Jesus but his entry as a new form that demands attention.

The founders of modern science they are not against Religion.

1.   Johannes Kepler: he was an unshaken believer.

2.   Galileo: he remained a faithful catholic believer.

These two people contacting Studies of material world to available to them.

Kepler: Astronomy disclose the causes of natural phenomena…much more loftier subjects are treated by “Holy writ”.

Galileo: “bible teaches us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens goes”.

Kepler: God’s revelation cannot be limited to scripture alone and God revels through nature/creation. In other words, God’s mouth (scripture) and God Deeds (Nature) should go through him. Nature and scripture or Bible and science both are God’s revelatory means.

Kepler- “Universe is bright temple of God” Isaac Newton- “Universe is a gift coming from God”

Bible also influenced some scientist

19^th century

Lord Rayleigh: Ps: 111:2-

Clerk Maxwell:

Alfred North Whitehead

Paul davies The western Christian philosophy contributed and influenced by European science.

Dick ripp

1.   God creative Rock

2.   A positive view of universe

In the middle age people are influenced by Platonism which negative view of the creation.

3.   Orderliness of the universe (Wisdom 11:20)

4.   The rationality of God (middle age ‘God’ is rational)

Science universe is rational everything is related to definite way. There would be some rationality within the creation.

5.   Faithfulness of God- rational God is faithful and steadfast. This faithful of God is manifested in the regularity (rhythms in nature) in the creation

6.   The human in the image of God. Scientist attempted to understand, what is the image in words?  

7.   Monotheism and universality of God. We believe that God is one. If God is one and his or her law also the same applicable anywhere. These are the universal application.

Ethical and social challenges of science and technology

Bio-Technology result is basically direct to the diesis affect the first world society.

Most of the modern Technology are capital intensive Technology not labour intensive Technology.

Manipulating and exploitative attitude. Promotes the objectification of human life.

Half of the scientist are working in defence research. And rest of them are working in the project that will provides the luxuries for the privilege of the societies.

Why we are not redirecting Technological research to meet basic human needs? I.e. food health and shelter.

Why we are not spending money for agriculture, reforestation, and family and creation welfare?

Bio-ethical issue

• Abortion
• Euthanasia
• IVF
• Surrogacy
• Genetic Engineering

What about the value of human life?

What about the understanding of family?

What about the understanding of Love your neighbour?

1.   Responsible use of science and Technology

2.   Strong states policy

3.   The value of human life should be taught/ promoted

4.   Just and equitable access to modern science and Technology

5.   Nature care

6.   The biblical concept: respect for Life

7.   Technology must be enable the human community to move forward

Philosophy and sociology of science

Auguste Comte: Science is an objective and value of free activity. Science based on all knowledge is based on senses and we know everything by observation and experiments.

John Locke: Ideas are empirical in original. Human mind is a blank tablet on which senses write.

David Hume: Scientific theory is a summary and correlation of individual observation.

Science argue that, only meaningful statement are empirical or experimental proposition verified by data.

• Theological, meta-physical and ethical statement basically fall short of this criteria.
• Theological, meta-physical and ethical statement also devoid of cognitive significant.

The philosophy of science is nothing but the knowledge of science must be verified by data, based on experiment.

Farncis B acon

• Basic nature of science is inductive and it should believe form unprejudiced and theory free observation.
• Any Science must be controlled by observation untainted by presupposition.
• Science approaches nature without innocent and uncorrupted eye.
• Science untimely based on induction that means, generalization must be made after strictest and numerous instance of observation.
• These generalization is proved by Data.