Religion and science in the modern world: a look at the problem from the side of religious denominations.

Klement'eva Tat'yana Nikolaevna ORCID: 0000-0002-7314-4633 PhD in Philosophy Associate Professor of the Department of Philosophy of Novosibirsk State Medical University 630091, Russia, Novosibirsk region, Novosibirsk, Krasny Prospekt str., 52 Sofiya.Klementeva.03@mail.ru

The problem of the relationship between science and religion is quite relevant recently and is being investigated by many domestic and foreign philosophers, theologians and scientists. The points of view on the nature of their relationship to each other are currently different, but in general can be reduced to four positions: conflict, independence, dialogue and synthesis.

            Supporters of the first point of view still believe that science and religion are hostile to each other ^[1-3]. This is due to the fundamental contradictions between scientific and religious worldviews, as well as the competition between them for solving the main metaphysical issues of human existence. This position is characterized by treating science as a new and true system of knowledge, and religion as an old and false one. These contradictions cannot but manifest themselves in the relationship between science and religion as social institutions that also compete for influence in public life.

            The second position recognizes the independence of religion and science, believing that they study different aspects of reality, have their own subject and research methods ^[4-7]. Science studies the structure of our world, and religion is more interested in the field of morality, individual and social behavior. Each of these social institutions must fulfill its tasks and not interfere in the affairs of the other. Many of the supporters of this point of view treat the problem of the conflict between religion and science as an exaggeration, an imaginary phenomenon and deny that it took place, for example, in European history. From their point of view, conflict situations arose when this principle of independence was violated, in particular, by the state authorities.

            The position of the dialogue indicates that science and religion do not oppose, but complement each other ^[8-15]. Despite the fact that they really study different areas of our reality, their interests overlap in certain issues. In particular, we are talking about the so-called main metaphysical questions of human existence: how the world, life on our planet, a reasonable person arose and what is the meaning of his existence. It was the different solutions to these problems that led to ideological contradictions and strained relations between religion and science. However, according to the proponents of this point of view, religion and science could quite successfully jointly seek answers to these questions, complementing each other. Scientific research and religious sacred texts should be considered as different, but complementary, sources of information. In general, the scientific system of knowledge about the material world and religious teachings about the ideal, spiritual world could complement each other and form a unified picture of the world.

            Finally, the fourth position asserts the possibility of a synthesis of religion and science in the future ^[16-20]. The confidence of the supporters of this point of view is based on the main trends in the development of science itself, which increasingly goes beyond the boundaries of directly observed phenomena and enters the field of traditional religious beliefs. Since the XX century, there have been more and more opportunities in modern science to study and explain a number of ideas and positions of the religious worldview. In the future, this process may lead to the synthesis and integration of religion and science.

            From our point of view, it is important and interesting to study the attitude of the participants of this interaction themselves – believers and scientists to this problem. In this regard, the goal was set to study the attitude of representatives of the main religious denominations of modern Russia to science and find out which of the above positions is the most common among them. Achieving this goal involved solving the following tasks: studying the attitude to the scientific community, to science as a whole as a way of knowing and explaining reality, to the conflict between science and religion, to the possibility of scientific proof of a number of provisions of the religious worldview, as well as the degree of familiarity with modern scientific theories and understanding the connection of some of them with religious teachings.

            The main method of research was an expert survey, which was conducted in the form of an in-depth interview. A total of 46 experts were interviewed, representing the main religious organizations registered in the Russian Federation, namely the Russian Orthodox Church, Evangelical Christians, the International Society for Krishna Consciousness, the Spiritual Administration of Muslims in Moscow, the Buddhist Traditional Sangha of Russia, the Roman Catholic Church, the Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia, the Zoroastrian Community of Moscow. 

            All experts have a spiritual rank (priests, imams, rabbis, lamas, sannyasis), are abbots of temples, teachers of religious educational institutions or hold other leadership positions in their organization. Most of them (78.3%) have higher secular education, most often of a humanitarian nature; a smaller part has technical, natural science and medical education.  All experts with higher religious education received at higher theological seminaries, Islamic and Buddhist universities, as well as at the Institute of Higher Vaishnava Education in India.  26% of them have a PhD or master's degree in theology. Most experts belong to the age group from 40 to 60 years (see Table 1) and have been followers of their faith for more than 25 years.   

                                                                                                                                       Table 1.

            In order to find out the influence of the peculiarities of the religious worldview on the attitude to science, the experts were divided into two groups. The first group included representatives of biblical religions, in particular, the Russian Orthodox Church, Evangelical Christians, the Roman Catholic Church, the Spiritual Administration of Muslims in Moscow and the Federation of Jewish Communities of Russia. The second group consisted of experts representing Eastern religions - the International Society of Krishna Consciousness, the Buddhist Traditional Sangha of Russia and the Zoroastrian Community of Moscow. The analysis of the results, taking into account this division, allowed us to identify the main factors influencing the choice of a particular position by respondents in assessing the relationship between religion and science in the modern world.

            The conducted research showed that the attitude of the interviewed experts to science in general and to the scientific community is different. Most of them have a positive experience of interacting with the scientific community, which left an excellent or good impression. Only a third of respondents (30.4%) rated their interaction with scientists satisfactorily. In addition, the absolute majority of experts (86.9%) consider cooperation between religious denominations and the scientific community possible and expedient. Of the proposed forms of such cooperation, preference was given to educational events, such as training seminars on the interaction of science and religion, joint conferences, educational projects for young people, the publication of popular books and magazines.

            With a high focus on cooperation with scientists, the interviewed representatives of religious denominations are well aware that there are reasons that complicate this process. The main one, from their point of view, is the low level of knowledge of believers in the field of science and, conversely, scientists in the field of religion. As a result of this state of affairs, there was mutual distrust and misunderstanding, both by believers and scientists, of the purpose of interaction between religion and science. It should be noted that experts representing Eastern religions have identified another important factor complicating the dialogue between religious denominations and the scientific community - the difference between scientific and religious language.  They also proposed one of the areas of possible cooperation with the scientific community, namely, bringing to a common understanding of the terminology used in the scriptures and modern science. Such work could prevent misunderstanding of what is behind certain terms, make possible dialogue and search for common ground.

            The attitude to science as a way of cognition and explanation of reality among the interviewed experts is less positive. However, it cannot be said that they completely deny scientific ideas and are extremely negative towards them. Only 8.7% of respondents said they were completely dissatisfied with the scientific explanation of reality. The majority of experts (65.2%) are partially satisfied with it, and some of them are even completely satisfied. Such a position in relation to science as a whole corresponds to the assessment of the degree of truth of scientific theories. Only a minority assessed these theories as a misconception that will be refuted over time. Half of the experts (52.2%) consider certain scientific theories to be true, and some of them rated scientific knowledge as completely true and objective. In our opinion, this indicates that representatives of religious denominations generally do not have a principled rejection of scientific views and ideas. Most of them are accepted by them as something that does not contradict their own worldview.

            However, this does not mean that the interviewed experts lack a critical attitude to science. As reasons for their dissatisfaction with scientific knowledge, they cited the fragmentary description of reality, the lack of a scientific explanation for a number of phenomena known in religion, the rapid variability of scientific theories, as well as the lack of trust in scientists who ignore the facts that refute their theories. Detailed comments on this issue mainly concerned the incompleteness of scientific knowledge, which is due to the materialistic nature of the scientific worldview. Many of the experts said that science studies only material, "tangible" aspects of reality, excludes God from the picture of the world and does not take into account more fundamental laws that cannot be studied by scientific methods and means.

            The answers to questions about the conflict between science and religion also indicate a fairly friendly attitude to science and a focus on cooperation with scientists. The majority of experts surveyed (69.5%) believe that there is no conflict between religion and science in the modern world. Almost half of them explain this by the fact that there is no reason for a conflict between religion and science, because they study different objects of reality, and their spheres of interest do not overlap. However, about 40% of respondents see the reasons for this in the convergence of scientific and religious worldviews. They pointed out such factors as the emergence of scientific theories confirming or explaining certain religious beliefs, and the growth in the number of scientists who are believers or friendly to religion. A minority of respondents (21.7%) agreed with the statement that there is a conflict between religion and science. The main reason for this was called the exclusion of God from the picture of the world. In addition to ideological reasons, experts also identified the socio-political causes of this conflict, in particular, the unequal opportunities of science and religion as social institutions.

            Discussion with experts of the problems of interaction between religion and science in the modern world has shown that they attach great importance to the process of "intersection" or, in some cases, even convergence of religious and scientific worldviews. Some scientific theories affect the field of traditional religious beliefs, which results in not only their refutation, but also, conversely, proof. Many experts consider this process as a necessary foundation for establishing constructive cooperation with the scientific community. In this regard, the study examined the respondents' attitude to the possibility of scientific proof of a number of provisions of the religious worldview, as well as the degree of their familiarity with modern scientific theories and understanding of the connection of some of them with religious teachings.

            The majority of the experts surveyed (65.2%) are confident that some of the provisions of their creed can be proved scientifically. However, only 43.5% of them were able to specifically say which provisions they were talking about. Even fewer experts (30.4%) named scientific theories and studies that prove these ideas. These results eloquently indicate that believers, even those who are well versed in theology, are not only poorly oriented in modern scientific research, but even sometimes do not know exactly which provisions of the religious worldview can be discussed in a scientific context today.

            The attitude to the issue of scientific proof of religious beliefs differs significantly among representatives of Eastern and biblical religions. The overwhelming majority of experts from Eastern religions (87.5%) are confident that such proof is possible, while among experts from Biblical religions only 53.3% of respondents agreed with this. A third of them insist that this is impossible in principle, rigidly separates the subjects of physics and metaphysics, believing that the transcendent world cannot be studied with the help of science. From their point of view, science and religion study different objects of reality, and the part of reality studied by religion is much broader and more complex. As a result, scientific methods are not suitable for this in principle.

            Belonging to a group of Eastern or biblical religions also had a strong influence on the choice of sciences, the subject of study of which is closest to the religious worldview. Experts from Eastern religions mainly chose physics and psychology, while representatives of biblical religions chose history, biology and genetics.  This choice is quite indicative. Eastern religions are focused on the study of the universe as a whole and the inner world of man. In this regard, it is not surprising that experts from Eastern religions have demonstrated a good knowledge of modern physics, cosmology and psychology. Among scientific theories and research, they primarily paid attention to quantum physics, which proves one of the most important ideas of all Eastern religions about the relationship of all objects and phenomena in the universe. The importance of studying human consciousness in general and, especially, its changes in the process of spiritual development was also noted. Many experts stressed that this process can and should be studied scientifically, and this is done by certain areas of modern psychology.

The biblical religions are more focused on the history of the creation of man, the development of the human race in general and the history of the Jewish people in particular.  Experts representing this group of religious denominations have singled out history as the main science that can confirm the truth of the Holy Scriptures. In general, they are more interested in humanitarian studies (not only historical and archaeological, but also linguistic, philosophical, cultural studies), studying the basic ideas of biblical creeds, their formation, development and influence on the life of society. Among the natural sciences, this group of experts preferred biology and genetics, because it is within the framework of the life sciences that refutations of evolutionism and Darwinism can be obtained.

Another purpose of the study was to study the familiarity of representatives of religious denominations with modern scientific concepts and concepts, as well as understanding the connection of some of them with religion. This makes it possible to understand how in reality the beliefs of believers in modern Russia differ from the scientific worldview, how strong these differences are and whether it is even possible to talk about the existence of a worldview conflict between them. To do this, respondents were offered a list of well-known scientific concepts, from which it was necessary to choose those that, in their opinion, are related to the religious worldview. The leaders were the concepts of consciousness (39.1%) and the multidimensionality of space-time (26.1%). Concepts such as the quantum field, catastrophism, the genetic code, transpersonal experience and clinical death were also popular. Only 8.7% of the experts surveyed believe that all the proposed scientific concepts have nothing to do with the religious worldview.

Despite the differences, the meaning of the explanations of their choice is identical for many respondents. For example, the concept of consciousness is chosen by most experts because it is key to any religious teaching. All religions, one way or another, explain the emergence of human consciousness, teach it to develop, purify and reveal its capabilities. Modern psychology does the same. Some experts have indicated the immaterial nature of consciousness as the reason for their choice, which makes this scientific concept synonymous with the religious concept of the soul.

The second concept that most experts chose was the concept of the multidimensionality of space-time. From the point of view of all experts, it corresponds to the spiritual world, the transcendent reality of all religions, which goes beyond our usual perception of space and time. It should be noted that representatives of Eastern religions were able to more accurately explain the connection of this concept with their worldview. For example, it was explained that the Vedas describe a picture of the Universe that does not fit into three-dimensional space and becomes possible only with the addition of additional dimensions associated with higher levels of the universe.  

As mentioned above, experts from Eastern religions attach great importance to physics, and therefore among the concepts they have chosen there are, for example, quantum field and wave-particle dualism, which they accurately correlate with the concepts of their creed. In particular, the scientific concept of the quantum field corresponds to the ancient Vedic concept of "akasha" - primary, unmanifested matter. Wave-particle dualism corresponds to the Vedic concept of "achintya", i.e. it is a philosophical category that unites opposite spheres of being. These spheres are comprehensible separately, but when they are considered simultaneously as a whole, they cannot be fully understood with the help of logic. At the same time, most experts from biblical religions are completely unfamiliar with these concepts (80% - with the concept of wave-particle dualism, 73.3% - with the concept of a quantum field).   

Among the scientific concepts concerning the nature and development of life, representatives of all faiths chose the concepts of the genetic code and catastrophism. Interestingly, the meaning of the explanation of this choice among experts from different faiths is identical. In particular, all experts see a connection between the concept of the genetic code in science and the religious idea of a Creator who creates and "programs" his creations in a special way. The genetic code is considered by them as information embedded in life forms from above, by God or by another external factor, of a nature unknown to us yet.

The recognition and scientific study of catastrophes in the history of the Earth is considered by many respondents as confirmation of various stories about catastrophes contained in many religious teachings. This is typical for representatives of both biblical and Eastern religions who have chosen the concept of catastrophism. The only difference is that experts from biblical religions associate this concept with the will of God, thus punishing people for their sins, while experts from Eastern religions understand the nature of catastrophes more universally and widely, spreading it to the entire universe. For example, Buddhists consider catastrophism to be a natural consequence of the cyclical nature of Time, the change of large periods of existence of life in the Universe and on our planet, when some forms of life die and are replaced by others. This is a natural law that does not depend on anyone's will.

As for ideas about a person, many experts associate such concepts as transpersonal experience and clinical death with a religious worldview. The explanations for this choice are also quite typical. Thus, the concept of transpersonal experience is identified by the respondents with religious experience, because in the process of any serious religious practice, the boundaries of the human personality are expanded and overcome. Through transpersonal experience, one can find ways to know God and communicate with God, with other higher powers, as well as go beyond the boundaries of the sensually perceived reality in which we live. Clinical death is also often associated with a religious worldview, because it is considered by experts to be a borderline situation between two worlds in which a person gets the opportunity to experience outside of bodily existence. A number of experts noted that clinical death is being investigated by religious analysts as proof of the afterlife of the human soul.

Also, in order to clarify the features of the worldview of believers, respondents were offered scientific statements formulated as general worldviews.  The list included statements based on the conclusions of both well-known scientific theories and creationist theories. As a result, the characteristics of scientific ideas that are part of the worldview of representatives of religious denominations of modern Russia were compiled.

The analysis of the results showed that a high degree of agreement among the respondents is caused by the ideas about the world formulated within the framework of modern physics and cosmology. Experts consider the Universe not eternal, having a beginning and an end of its existence in time (56.5%), and consisting of many realities that are in other dimensions of space–time (30.4%). They also agree that there are different types of matter, some of which are beyond human perception (47.8%). Some respondents see a connection between matter and energy, believing that it is energy that is primary in relation to the substance of our world (21.7%). Some of them believe that at the field level, the universe is a single organism, all parts of which are connected to each other (17.4%). All these concepts correspond to the main provisions of the modern quantum-field physical picture of the world, as well as such cosmological theories as inflationary cosmology and string theory. At the same time, a significant part of respondents see the relationship between consciousness and matter and agree that human consciousness is able to influence the state of matter (43.5%), which is more in line with the religious view of the world. The results obtained indicate that the ideas about matter and the Universe of more than half of the experts surveyed do not contradict modern scientific views on the world.   

As for ideas about life, its origin and development, most experts tend to creationist solutions to these issues. They insist that the evolution of biological species is not random, but natural (34.7%), and human evolution could not have happened at all without reasonable outside intervention (47.8%). However, speaking about the development of life, a third of respondents drew attention to the modern scientific understanding of the role of catastrophes in the history of the Earth. Some of them agreed with the statement that the development of life is an alternation of stages of stable existence and catastrophes (26.1%), as well as with the fact that mass extinctions of biological species in the past indicate that humanity is not eternal (30.4%).

It should be noted that the choice and agreement with the proposed scientific ideas largely depended on the religious denomination of the respondent. Thus, among experts representing biblical religions, the most popular statements were about the beginning and end of the existence of the Universe and that human evolution could not happen without reasonable outside intervention. Both of these statements are as consistent as possible with the biblical worldview. A third of the experts in this group agree that there is an invisible part of the universe located in other dimensions of space–time. All other statements were chosen by no more than 6-13% of respondents, which indicates the selective attitude of experts to scientific ideas. They agree only with those of them that almost literally correspond to the basic tenets of the biblical creeds.

Another picture is given by the analysis of the answers to this question by experts from Eastern religions.  The list of statements chosen by them is much broader and the degree of agreement with them is higher. So among the ideas about the Universe, the absolute leader was the statement that there are different types of matter, some of which are beyond human perception. This group is also characterized by a high degree of agreement with the ideas about the important role of global catastrophes in the development of life on Earth, about the Universe as a system, a single organism and that life can exist in different forms, not only in the form of protein bodies (see Table 2). 

                                                                                                                             Table 2.

Of course, the choice of all respondents was influenced by their creed. All of them sympathize with those scientific ideas that at least partially correspond to their religious worldview. However, a comparison of expert responses from Biblical and Eastern religions has shown that the former see much fewer such correspondences than the latter. The Eastern religious worldview allows us to find more related ideas, some "points of intersection" with the scientific worldview, which explains the greater awareness of representatives of Eastern religious denominations in the achievements of modern science.

Thus, based on the analysis of the results obtained, the following conclusions were made. The religious confessions of modern Russia are characterized by a rather positive and friendly attitude towards the scientific community. They are focused on cooperation with him, especially in the field of educational activities. The position of the ongoing conflict between religion and science is the least common among the interviewed experts. Despite all the weaknesses and limitations of the scientific method of cognition and the materialistic nature of the scientific worldview, most experts believe that religion and science can peacefully coexist with each other.

The position of the synthesis of religion and science is also not popular. The study showed that this point of view is mainly characteristic of experts representing Eastern religions and having a higher natural science education or a degree in natural sciences. This makes it possible to easily navigate modern scientific knowledge and understand where and how it intersects with the religious worldview.  

The most common positions in assessing the relationship between religion and science have become positions of independence and dialogue. From the point of view of most experts, these are independent spheres of knowledge and human activity that can help each other and even complement each other. However, the study of this position revealed a number of problems that hinder its implementation in practice. Firstly, complementarity and dialogue for the interviewed experts is expressed in the ability to use scientific data or theories to confirm only their views. At the same time, they are not ready to change them if the scientific data do not correspond to them. Secondly, the study revealed a rather low level of respondents' knowledge in the field of modern scientific theories, which is a serious obstacle to conducting an equal dialogue. Only a small number of experts have demonstrated competence sufficient for real interaction with the scientific community.