has science replaced religion? Flashcards
yes - comte - 3 stages of development
society has passed through 3 stages of development - theological (religious beliefs dominated society), metaphysical and positive (science grew and developed and religion declined)
In the theological stage, religion dominated, but science grew through the metaphysical and positive stages to eventually replace religion as it is rooted in facts with evidence, whilst religion is based on belief in holy texts.
comte evaluation
feminists - science isn’t pure knowledge, it serves the interest of men, e.g biological difference between women and men isn’t a scientific fact but instead a social construct
yes - weber - rationalisation
supports comte - rationalisation - catholic worldview saw world as enchanted garden full of supernatural beings but protestant worldview started process of rationalisation - using science to understand how the world works. as people developed rational understanding, need for religious explanations declined - process of disenchantment
weber evaluation
gould - science and religion are equally important so science can’t replace religion as we need both - they’re NOMA (non-overlapping magisteria) - science gives us factual knowledge whilst religion gives us moral guidelines
yes - popper - science is open belief system
science = open belief system where every theory is open to scrutiny and criticism through testing by others as scientific knowledge isn’t sacred, unlike religion, or the absolute truth - can be falsified when new evidence emerges. scientific knowledge is cumulative - grows for a greater understanding of the world so science is replacing religion as it has evidence for its claims
Comte, Popper and Horton - see science as completely different to religion as while scientific knowledge is provisional, open to challenge and disprovable, religion claims to have special knowledge of absolute truth and that its knowledge is sacred so can’t be challenged or replaced so religious knowledge is fixed and can’t grow.
popper evaluation
kuhn - science is not open, it rejects challenge and only rewards scientists who work within the paradigm
no - berger and luckmann - social construct
humans create universes of meaning which make sense of their lives. universes of meaning need constant legitimation which is done through belief systems that are socially constructed with the purpose to legitimate and justify the universe and meaning - all belief systems are equally valid so science can’t replace religion
no - postmodernists - metanarratives
see both science and religion as metanarratives, non of which are more valid than the rest.
lyotard - science is just another metanarrative that falsely claims to find the truth for the betterment of society, when in reality it is just another discourse used to dominate people, however in postmodernity people have started to lose faith in science as they have become sceptical of all metanarratives - increasing awareness of negative outcomes from science have discredited science
postmodernists evaluation
lyotard ignores extent to which people still accept other metanarratives such as religion and he seems to be unaware that postmodernism itself is a metanarrative as it claims to be the true view of the world
no - marxists - religion and science coexist
religion cant be replaced as an ideological influence as it’s part of the r/c ideology that creates FCC therefore as long as there is the need to indoctrinate the w/c, religion will need to exist. Science is driven by needs of capitalism - technological developments in industry are a result of the r/c pursuit of profit as they make factory production more efficient. therefore, science and religion coexist in the superstructure as they both serve capitalism
marxists evaluation
religion has positive function for individuals e.g psychological help
