The problem of relations between religion and science is one of the perennial problems that existed throughout the historical development of philosophy. We can distinguish four basic historical stages of formulating and solving this problem:

Antiquity.

Antique epoch characterized by the coexistence and interpenetration of philosophy, science, and religious ideas.

Middle ages.

Religion was at the top and certainly prevailed over philosophy and science. Church resisted and prevented the growth and development of science.

New age.

In modern times, the conflict between religion and science is increasing and becoming more serious.

Modern period.

Modern society is undergoing dramatic end of an era with its characteristic absolution of the role and importance of the mind, the rational in the whole spiritual life.

The purpose of my article is to clarify the relationship of religion and science, as well as the principles of their relationship to the present stage.

Currently, for religion and science there is a common activity for the consent and cooperation. The principles of science can be resistant to a certain stage of the whole development, but as the opening of new facilities they may require a radical revision, which entails a review of the principles that express the ideals and norms of scientific research. For a long time dominated by the belief that the modern type of civilization is the main way of social progress, although this civilization has led to enormous advances in manufacturing technology, it has created, and global crises, jeopardized the very existence of mankind.

"Today, there are good reasons to doubt the ability of modern civilization find a way out of these crises without changing the strategy of development and basic values of technological culture." There are new situation of dialogue between science and religion that make certain changes to the former status of full autonomy and self-worth of research "

Stepin V.S. Philosophy and religion in socio-cultural aspect.

It seems that one of the factors of the destructive tendencies of the scientific and technological civilization can serve as the alliance between science and Christianity. This alliance is quite natural: he suggests sober assessment of our intelligence capabilities, characteristic both for Christian theology, which Createdness conscious human mind, never identifies it with the divine, and for the most perceptive philosophers and eminent scientists "

Gaidenko P.P. Christianity and science: opposition or union.

Theologians do not talk about the opposition between science and religion, but on the contrary, are trying to convince that "research in all disciplines, if it really is carried out scientifically and in accordance with moral norms, in fact, can never conflict with the faith ."

Even in the 60 years of the twentieth century, this principle has been formally set out in the Pastoral Constitution. Given the success of science, theologians are trying to improve their attitude towards it. The peculiarity of theological modernism in this area is that, proclaiming the union of science and religion, not discarding the achievements of science, he rejects her "exaggerated claims to objective truth. "On the theoretical level of religious consciousness ... the deepest motive of modernism is not only an objective need to rethink the outdated canons of a new religious way, but also the desire of Church theorists as to adapt to the new faith, to include it in the main religious provisions and thereby maintain its the impact on the minds of the faithful. "

Voroshilova A.A. Religious consciousness and ways of its existence.

In the "Basic Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church" set out the principles the relations of scientific and religious knowledge: "The scientific and religious knowledge are completely different in nature. They have different assumptions, different goals, objectives and methods. These areas may touch, overlap, but do not oppose each other ... Religion does not deal with matter. "

The problem of the relation of faith and knowledge of a lot of attention is paid to the Russian philosophy. "There is no evidence to suggest that knowledge is superior to faith. Knowledge feeds that gives faith, and then the difference is only in the nature of faith itself. Rationalism holds only that does not go to the first principles, not dates back to the origins. The origins of the always find faith. "

Berdyaev N.A. The philosophy of freedom.

Currently, important is the problem of demarcation of science and theology. The problem is whether a scholar - a scholar of religion, while remaining scientists admit as an option to explain the observed phenomenon of a supernatural explanation of the intervention of God. Can a scientist regarded as hypotheses that could be relevant objective reality, ie, true, the assumption of creation out of nothing, the creation of man, and so on? Many philosophers continue to hold the view that the mandatory criterion of scientific character in the study of religion is a fundamental rejection of the admissibility of the influence of the supernatural. The scientist, who allowed as an option for further explanation of any divine intervention phenomena, considered in turn a theologian. The materialist view is the scientific problem as follows: "Scientific research only, not allowing the intervention of God, because research, allowing the intervention of God, not science."

Most supporters of strict inadmissible hypothesis of God into science when discussing the problem of demarcation between science and non-science guided by notions of classical science Laplace times, who said that "did not need the hypothesis of God." It should be noted that the philosophy of science at the present time, many scientific attributes were seriously revised. Having examined the influence of Christianity on the genesis of the natural sciences, Protestant theology has had an impact, on the conceptual apparatus of classical mechanics, its fundamental principles and methods of their study. Today there are already a lot of work, which analyzes this kind of connection between the genesis of modern European natural science and religious movements of the XVI - XVII centuries.

In my opinion it is impossible to talk about the opposition of faith and knowledge. "Belief, including religious, should be interpreted as" probable knowledge ", adopted by the consciousness of the subject the decision to accept something potentially admissible as true for the corresponding objective reality. In this sense, faith has been defined yet the Apostle Paul: "Faith is the substance of things hoped for and the invisible" (Hebrews 11: 1.) In this aspect of faith is almost identical to the epistemological view in ancient philosophy, a guess about something unknown. The object of faith can be something fundamentally unprovable in a rational way, including the supernatural or is unreliable, but is able to be certified in the future. When faith is communicated to the reliability, it is destroyed, then it is not faith, but knowledge.

A number of scientists do not deny the relationship of religion and science. Religion and science did not exclude each other, as previously thought, and that many of our contemporaries are afraid, they are consistent and complement each other. World of Higher Reality - the world of plans, laws, relations between elements of matter - it's not a mythical or hypothetical event, but only physically. Scientists say there is a new physical theory, created as a result of Albert Einstein's ideas, in which there was a certain level of reality, which is synonymous with religion is a God - a kind of reality, which has all the attributes of Deity. And our methods know it, to study possible. Science does not prove, but merely points to the existence of God.

Scientists also believe that the physical vacuum - it matter- progenitor of everything in the universe, giving birth to the elementary particles of which atoms and molecules are then formed. They believe that all the phenomena of nature are made of atoms and molecules with nuclear and atomic rotating elementary particles, and is the source of physical fields, then all life is endowed with physical fields. Everything in this world is universal. Theory of physical fields allowed convincing enough to show what place in the world, in nature and in a global sense - in the universe - may take a higher power that controls the scenario of development of nature in general.

Believers scientists actually very little, religious was Einstein. For example, Einstein said in 1929 on the question of his beliefs: "I believe in Spinoza's God, who manifests himself in the harmony of all that exists, but not in a God who cares about the fate and actions of men." Einstein also used the term "religion", but when friends reproached him of using religious terminology, he said: "I just could not find a better word. I have no business to priests who are cashing in on this capital. " In short, Einstein definitely was not a theist, and, to my mind, its the right thing, like Spinoza, considered a pantheist. The difference, in fact, I do not see between pantheism and atheism "

Nowadays, the idea of the existence of the cosmic mind, who created the world and governs them, are increasingly vocal as the philosophers and representatives of science. Difficulties study the evolution of the problem of existence of the observable universe with its specific parameters, are forced to introduce new principles in science, which was formerly considered unscientific, such as teleological.

It turns out that matter - is not the root cause and not the cause. Matter - is the result of the Mind universe of information and energy, that is a consequence. Our material world - a world of effects. World of the root causes - of the universal mind, which generates information programs Ecumenical processes and reorganize the energy that flows according to the program implementing these processes. According to this point of view, the truth is hidden from us the Mind of the Universe. Scientists say that the universe is mind mankind in ancient times called God. Just due to the fact that he is, in the universe there is a global order. The universe is grown in strict accordance with the laws of the Universe under the constant control of the Universal Mind. Otherwise, it would be chaos.

To address the issue of evolution of the universe is important anthropic principle. This principle captures the relationship between the properties of the universe and the appearance in her life, mind, cosmic civilizations. Define the anthropic principle as an assumption, which are as follows: The universe is what it is, as it were, to it at a certain stage of its evolution might appear a thinking being - the observer (optional - earth people). This "weak" version of the anthropic principle. There is also a "strong" version of the anthropic principle, which identifies the universe with the investigation implementation of the "plan" imply a supernatural causes -. God or the Overmind It is this version of the anthropic principle is called "anthropic boom Scientists believe that the strong anthropic principle is consistent with the biblical idea of the eternal divine purpose of human creation. .

Recognized in scientific circles anthropic principle does not contradict Christian theology on the question of the purpose of creation of the world. The anthropic principle finds its match in the Scriptures, according to which man is the crown of creation and God-manhood - his goal. In this sense, the anthropic principle is a kind of bridge between the scientific and the religious world.

Other scientists criticized the understanding of the anthropic principle, which amounts to the recognition of higher powers. In fact, the so-called anthropic principle comes down to the observation that life (the existence of living organisms) as we know it is not possible for all the physical parameters that characterize the matter. In our universe, these parameters are such that life is possible. If there are other universes (in this case, correct to call them Metagalaxy), but this hypothesis exists, some of them characterized by different parameters of interaction between the particles of matter, life would be impossible. And here God and religion ?.

звезды-галактики-вселенная-открытый-космос-800x

Others believe that the idea imply a supernatural, intangible beginning - God or

supermind - redundant due to infertility in the context of explaining the phenomenon of evolution. The teleological scenario God is considered auspicious. But if he is all-powerful, his decision to allow human and animal life to evolve on the way Darwinian evolution that comes into direct conflict with its all-good. How could God choose senseless, cruel and incredibly expensive Darwinian process as a way to create intelligent life on earth? In the end, it innumerable much more sympathetic mechanisms were available.

As the existence and non-existence of God can be neither proved nor disproved natural scientific means. Therefore, synergy can be neither theistic nor atheistic. Synergy is based on the study of the phenomenon of self-organization, so that the influence of the god, at first glance, is excluded. But we can pose questions and more: who created the then laws, which occurs self-organization? Or do we know that the development of self-organizing system is always determined by the fluctuations that we can not foresee, but they are inherent in the system. If the scientist intends to explore "the machine of the universe" or "car life", he is constantly faced with something outlandish, meaningful and appropriate not only in biological, but also in geophysical and meteorological processes. In the face of the universe, I myself feel reverential feelings. However, I do not think that we are in our studies are confronted with a mysterious and silent creature, whether it is ultimately in the universe, or only in our hearts.

Scientists theorize that the observed complex phenomena does not have any of the empty space, and exist in nature from the outset in some hidden, latent form. He admits the existence of an ideal reality, complementary material reality, which he calls the creative potential. Since God and the Overmind require recognition of the supernatural predestination, standing above the world, it is unacceptable for science.

If we ask the question - who have been encoded in the singularity or spontaneous vacuum fluctuations are the main features of the universe, the possibility of life, mind, cosmic civilizations, or where did the creative potential, the final answer to this question in science today, we do not find.

As shown, the opinions expressed are diametrically opposed. Here again we are confronted with the limits of our knowledge. But as you know, these boundaries are mobile and require from science,

that she now gave answers to these difficult questions, then, to demand a miracle. Science at any given time does not answer, of course, to all the questions, but it is continually evolving. Bringing the same God as the answer to the unsolved problems - it's just the reduction of one unknown to another unknown that is called God. Perhaps the explanation for the relationship between the natural holistic properties of the evolving universe and the possibility of appearing in her life is achieved without appealing to transcendent forces. While a definitive answer to this question science has not yet developed.

In conclusion, we can say that the religious understanding of the world does not reject the legitimacy of scientific knowledge of the laws of the world. But it must be emphasized that science and religion different research subjects: religion studies the relationship of man to God, and science - the laws of the world that research methods, which are based on religion and science are different. Currently, when there is a threat of technological disasters, conducting research in the field of genetics, it must be recognized that the principles of science are insufficient. It requires further relate them to social values, which are the condition for the functioning of science. There are new situation of dialogue between science and religion that make certain changes to the former status of full autonomy of scientific research.

Author @moneymaker

When writing the article helped study scientists and philosophers.