The Polarization and Reconciliation of Science and Religion

Abstract

Science and religion seek an explanation for the basis of reality, but neither has the ability to objectively decide the ultimate question concerning God’s existence. Theism and atheism are both based on faith; and, in the absence of convincing arguments, proponents of each have polarized in the heat of debate. The essential ontological question about God has been overshadowed by irrelevant arguments. The literal truth of the Bible, as well as the effectiveness of science as a method of understanding natural phenomena, have become proxy issues that are completely irrelevant to the existence of God. Consilience, which posits the unitary nature and coherence of all knowledge (Knowledge is known truth), assures us that the reconciliation of science and religion is possible insofar as practitioners of each discover the truth in varying degrees. A key insight provided by John Dewey’s and Arthur Bentley’s theory of knowledge, as described in “Knowing and the Known”, is that the apprehension of truth by finite mind is always limited and imperfect. It is reasonable to assume, therefore, that as scientists, philosophers and theologians make progress incrementally in the understanding of ultimate truth, the statements they each make should increasingly demonstrate elements of correspondence. Until then it is clear that agnosticism offers an honest starting point in consideration of the question whether the universe the sufficient cause of itself, or whether it bears an imprint of a transcendental cause from beyond its spatial and temporal dimensions.