The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Do Science and Religion Clash? Prop will argue No, Opp will argue Yes.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/7/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 520 times Debate No: 90844
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (7)
Votes (0)




Round 1 for acceptance and stating your points.

Mine are:
1) They exist for different reasons
2) They can support each other
3) Any clash in the past was due to human interpretation and not religion or science themselves.

Hope to have an interesting debate!


I, NIGHTANDKNIGHT, accept the challenge. Let’s hope, whether you or I win or lose, we both would learn something useful.
These are my points:
• Science is based on logic. Religion is based on belief.
• While religion explain many things with an illogical concept, science always explain topics with a logical concept.
• On many topics both science and religion has a say. Both the concept of science and religion differ (many times) and thus they clash.
• If religion and science support one another then a person of scientific mind and of religious mind would interpret the same thing and they would not have become ‘agents of clashing’.
• Science and religion exist for different reason but both cover a large field. In many place they come in contact with one another. In these cases mostly due to conceptual difference they clash.

With this I end my argument for round 1. Good luck Orose Khan
Debate Round No. 1


Orose_Khan forfeited this round.


Waiting for further reply
Debate Round No. 2


Orose_Khan forfeited this round.


Waiting For Further Reply.
Debate Round No. 3


Sry abt the forfeits, I had exams. Will try to be as concise as possible.

Science exists for us to learn more about the physical and natural worlds. Religion exists to follow an ethical code of conduct.

Religion explains social issues from a moralistic perspective while Science explains natural phenomena from a logical perspective. Social issues and natural phenomena are too different things.

An aspect of a religion's ethical code can be service to mankind. The scientific endeavour can yield more ways to serve humanity.

I believe I have refuted your points and supported my own. Again, I apologise for my inactivity and also for the rushed argument.


Thank You Pro for your argument. Sorry for the late reply, Orose Khan, I was myself busy for test. However now I get back to the topic. I will state two clashes science and religion have, currently. I have just state them as conflicts, hope this is alright.
Current conflicts:
Two major examples of conflicts between science and religion at the present time are:
Creation science & evolution:
"Many conservative Christians believe in the inerrancy of the Bible. Although they have are many competing theories over details, many conclude that a literal interpretation of Genesis in the Hebrew Scriptures indicates that God created the world during a six day, 144 hour period, sometime between 4004 and perhaps 8000 BCE.
"Cosmologists have reached a near consensus that the universe is about 13.7 billion years old and that the Earth coalesced about 4.5 billion years ago.
"Many conservative Christians accept a literal interpretation of the biblical book of Genesis which seems to imply that all of the species of plant and animal life were created during this six day interval.
"Essentially all biologists believe that the various species evolved over hundreds of millions of years, mainly or completely through the processes of natural selection.
Beliefs concerning lesbians, gays, bisexual trans gender persons and transsexuals (the LGBT community):
"Human sexuality researchers and therapists have reached a near consensus that homosexuality is a minority sexual orientation, one of three natural, normal orientations, mainly caused by genes. It is said to be unchangeable -- or essentially so -- during adulthood. Many religious conservatives say that it is an unnatural, abnormal lifestyle, mainly caused by inadequate parenting and/or sexual molestation during childhood; it is chosen, and can be changed.
"Researchers and therapists have reached a near consensus that transgenderism is caused by hormonal imbalances in the womb; they often recommend gender reassignment surgery if the individual qualifies. Trans gender persons often describe themselves as being female trapped in a male body, or vice verse. Many religious conservatives say that it is a caused by gender confusion and is treatable through prayer and counseling; many professes that gender reassignment surgery is a very serious sin.

These two clashes are confined to Christianity only. Two other conflict between Islam and Science are:

"First Humans: The Qur"an and Hadith contains stories concerning the 'first humans' and how all people are descended from these two earliest ancestors. It states that humans were created in a garden (paradise) and then brought to earth fully formed. This view of the origins of human life is clearly contradicted by the numerous fossils of pre-homosapien species that lived on earth for millions of years before modern humans first evolved.
"Seven Planets in the Universe: A verse claims there are seven planets. However, according to astronomers, there are eight ordinary planets and five dwarf planets, which leaves the grand total at thirteen in our solar system. Modern astronomy also has found hundreds of other planets in other solar systems and Cosmologists estimate that hundreds of billions of stars and planets exist in the universe. The author of the Qur' an singling out such a small number of celestial objects only reaffirms his ignorance of the makeup of the universe.

Now I will state two clashes between Hinduism and science:
1) Earth is fixed, don't rotate or revolve.
2) Sky stand on support.

So we can see that there is an existence of clashes in science and religion. After showing these clashes I can clearly conclude science and religion do clash. They may exist for different reason but clashes have and taking place. With this I end my debate. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 4
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by enigmatic.e 2 years ago
I believe that science complements and explains some of God's creations.
Posted by Orose_Khan 2 years ago
Sorry everyone, I had exams and stuff. Also, @Heiro, that's the point of religion. To have faith.
Posted by NIGHTANDKNIGHT 2 years ago
Seemingly someone has forgotten something
Posted by Heirio 2 years ago
"Science DOES prove the existence of God."

No it doesn't.

"The Law of Conservation of Energy would discount the very existence of the Universe. The Big Bang would have required a huge amount of energy which must have come from somewhere. Christians say that that somewhere is God, Muslims say Allah and the list goes on."

This is basically: "We don't know, therefore God."
Posted by missmedic 2 years ago
Religion often uses science to prove some point, however science never uses religion to prove anything, what does that tell you.
To understand why "God does not exist" can be a legitimate scientific statement, it's important to understand what the statement means in the context of science. When a scientist says "God does not exist," they mean something similar to when they say "aether does not exist," "psychic powers do not exist," or "life does not exist on the moon."
All such statements are casual short-hand for a more elaborate and technical statement:
"this alleged entity has no place in any scientific equations, plays no role in any scientific explanations, cannot be used to predict any events, does not describe any thing or force that has yet been detected, and there are no models of the universe in which its presence is either required, productive, or useful."
Posted by Orose_Khan 2 years ago
Science DOES prove the existence of God. The Law of Conservation of Energy would discount the very existence of the Universe. The Big Bang would have required a huge amount of energy which must have come from somewhere. Christians say that that somewhere is God, Muslims say Allah and the list goes on.
Posted by missmedic 2 years ago
Science is defined by the method scientists use to make discoveries and produce knowledge. The scientific method separates science from unsuccessful attempts to produce knowledge which people try to sell: faith, religion, pseudoscience, etc. Understanding science means understanding how the scientific method works, how scientists work, and so why science is superior to the alternatives. We rely too much on science to pretend it's no better than or different from the alternatives.
A popular objection to atheists' arguments and critiques of theism is to insist that one's preferred god cannot be disproven " indeed, that science itself is unable to prove that God does not exist. This position depends upon a mistaken understanding of the nature of science and how science operates. In a very real and important sense, it is possible to say that, scientifically, God does not exist " just as science is able to discount the existence of a myriad of other alleged beings
No votes have been placed for this debate.