Why Science vs Religion is a Psychological Debate?

I would commence by introducing a Greek term - Logos. It refers to the logical explanation of the metaphysical world around us which is objective reality for each individual. Each of us has a different explanation for the life which occurs uniquely for us as individuals. A tribal from Amazon forest will comprehend reality in ways substantially disparate from an urban dweller in Mumbai. Logos is one of the facets of the three aspects through which we decipher the world around us. The remaining two

 are Pathos(emotional comprehension of life) and Ethos(something believed to be true by a large group).

Religions all over the world have served as systems which societies have used to comprehend the reality around them. Some would believe in an idea of God, someone in another idea of Parmatma. Some believe that there is a superpower and all religions are same. Societies needed to be glued together so that they could survive hence, they built knowledge systems which countered the perplex occurrences of life around them. If it was not religion, then societies could not stay together, arrive on common goal as a for all, fight the malevolence of life or be subjugated by other societies which had better Logos than theirs. It is vastly for this reason that people often cite religious interpretations of life. Some would find mythologies extremely compelling and they would go lengths to convince people around, some would find them utterly misleading and their are countless interpretations for every humans being. This means that what we believe to be true is the way we comprehend reality and often at times this can be controversial, opposing, blasphemy, etc. Religions have even developed institutions to protect their Logos by ways of punishments and had ostracized those who didn't adhere to their respective doctrines. A common goal of religious contestation is the promulgation of same idea around - belief in a particular idea of supernatural, society, gender, human destiny etc.

Hence, we can argue that what we consider orthodox today had been gospel at a time. So, what disturbed the equation?

From the time of cognitive revolution, or the time when scientific discoveries had been in infancy, a tumultuous battle between religions and science has also prevailed. Scientific progress is rooted in interpreting the aspects of metaphysical reality in yet another way – experimentation, observation, mathematics etc. Since a scientific theory is a belief which is proved overtime with exact results, it is more compelling than religious doctrines. This means we can subside religious, cultural, social beliefs which do not adhere to scientific norms. This is also motivated by the intrinsic nature of both the logos. Science is progressed by questioning, improving, experimenting certain theory which gives way for the next bigger questions. If we have discovered genetics, how can we reengineer, modify, restructure them? If we understand how gravity works, how can we develop better technology to help us travel across space? If we can develop Artificial Intelligence, how can we build humanoid robots? This means science is rapidly creating a new ‘logic’, which is rapidly making religious ‘logic’ seem spurious.

Earlier religions had deemed famines, plagues, diseases as acts of God, and were even considered preordained. But we have developed biomedicine which has curbed deadly diseases, built economic models which distribute resources in a way that has alleviated poverty on an unprecedented scale. We are on the verge of making robots. We are hoping for a better future. We are building ‘nootropics’ which are medicines to enhance brain’s cognitive abilities, relieve stress, improve memory and concentration. These nootropics are common in Silicon Valley and are increasingly becoming a huge market. This means what we consider as destiny or ‘karma’ is becoming obsolete. Many people today believe that they can improve their lives counter to a time when everything was considered as a plan of God. We would worship moon as God at some time, but today we are planning to mine moon, and even inhabit it. The whole ‘logic’ seems to be shifting.

Religions gain confidence by ‘explaining’ the concepts which our current scientific developments cannot. For eg, in Hinduism there is a belief about existence of time periods ‘kaal’. According to it, the present time is about ‘kalyug’, where noble sentiments like compassion, honesty, brotherhood etc. are noon-existent. This is synonymous to the ‘worst yug’ which will be accompanied by an apocalypse.
But, science interprets contemporary period as the one where we have progressed tremendously, poverty is the lowest, discrimination of various sorts is obliterated(or still left, but heading in the same direction) and we have enshrined democracy and protection of human rights as the governing principles. Scientists often quip religious leaders as all of them claiming each of their religion to be ‘scientific’ but science does not have to contend to being ‘religious’. This is a victory since medieval times where believing anything beyond sacred texts was punishable. Today, we have overcome much of religious logos. Hence, science has won the logical realm also. Countries are investing heavily in scientific researches and almost nothing on religious activities in the West and other countries are following the lead too. This has made science the new religion and scientists as the new priests.

We can all confirm to the term ‘logical’ being applied to more ‘scientific’ things today than ‘religious’ things. Is it possible that in the future, people will totally follow scientific way of comprehending their reality and religion will be obsolete (much of religious explanations are already obsolete)? We are making progress in biomedicine, genetics, supercomputers, space, etc. which will again change our shared understanding of the world. Will we worship moon while we can also have a trip to the moon? – a common question we can ask today, hoping space trips will be possible in the future. I would argue that scientific logos will eventually trounce entire religious logos and religious mythologies will be regarded as a past activity. People will eventually choose the option which will benefit them the most. Science has created an ethos today. It is the psychology which makes us believe what is truth and what is not. We are finding that religion is ‘making less sense today’ than it might have did in previous times. But still, religions claim to explain concepts which science has not been able to do so far and still the idea of a supernatural or God is pervasive. But what if we eventually reach a point through incessant researches, experiments and tests where we are able to articulate multivariate realities through scientific discoveries, will it obliterate religion? I think there will always be dimensions left unexplored, things left unexplained, reality left unperceived that we will need to rely upon a belief to help us explain the logos of the universe. It is not a battle between Science vs Religion, but which school of thought is making more sense, explaining the complex reality, can be proved and remain consistently logical. Science truly is gaining the upper hand of our logos today. We will believe something which convinces us more than its opposing narrative in the end.