Complementarity Of Religion And Science In The Context Of Postmodern Culture

Abstract

In the conditions of the modernist development of society and culture, the relationship between religion and science has complex, contradictory ties, often having a formidable opposition. Each of these forms of social consciousness has only its inherent content, practically unrelated to each other. The development of science, technology, social transformations, post-industrial development lead to the fact that their relationship is radically changing, their sharp opposition, mutual denial is overcome, their basic foundations are blurred. Researchers, trying to overcome the crisis of religion and modern science, come to the need to establish a dialogue between these forms of culture, try to bring them together, complement them, which forms a kind of synthesis consisting of heterogeneous structural components. In religion, the meaning of the transcendental changes, precisely as the meaning of objective, true knowledge changes for science, is interpreted within the postmodern methodology framework. The structural hierarchy of the organization of knowledge is scientific, and scientific religion is being violated. The question of the priority of religion over science, or, conversely, science over religion, is removed. Following this methodology, there is a rejection of common sense, rationalism, moral perfection. However, at the same time, now the belief in the Internet culture has begun to prevail, the possibilities of which make it possible to meet with any supernatural beings, aliens, predictors. Such opportunities change people's worldview, spiritual, and cultural values and form a new type of culture, both scientific and moral.

Keywords: Dialogue, fundamentalism, modernity, postmodernism, religion, realism

Introduction

Religion and science are specific cultural phenomena, certain forms of social consciousness. Religion and science play an important role in society, contributing to the spiritual, cultural, intellectual development of people and social groups. Through religion, art, morality, knowledge, science, a person learns himself, his kind, society, and the world as a whole.

There are two alternative ways of knowing the world – scientific and non-scientific. The non-scientific way of knowing the world includes religious experience. In cognition, these methods of cognition are based on rational knowledge, logic, religious feelings, and experiences based on faith, not subject to doubt. Religion imposes on human consciousness transcendental values ​​that are not subject to doubt, critical analysis, and, therefore, absolute, authoritarian. Meanwhile, science is relative, democratic. Science can and should question its positions. Religious knowledge is absolute; the opposite assumption is a great sign from religion's point of view. Scientific knowledge is relational, making it possible to recognize their dynamics, movement from the singular, particular to the general. There is no such generalization in religion. For a long time, the relationship between science and religion was reduced because they were interpreted as diametrically opposite, mutually denying phenomena.

The following differences are highlighted between science and religion. Science is characterized by a critical view of everything that happens; there are no absolute truths for it; pressured by new evidence, it revises previous results. The source of faith is not objective reality but super-cash revelation, knowledge given to man from above; religion answers the ultimate questions related to absolute ideals. Thus, a demarcation line is established between religion and science, which determines the relationship between them. Science as a body of objective knowledge adequately expresses fundamental processes and gradually forms a holistic vision of the study's object.

It should be noted that religion and science operate in different categories, the content of which is directly opposite: religious concepts are static, unchanging, when scientific concepts are mobile, changeable. So, in religion, the concept of "God" has its explanation; in the Bible, God is interpreted: God is too pure to look favorably on evil; He is too holy to have any connection with sin. He sent Jesus to the people to save the man. God is love; He sent Jesus to the cross, who died for people. Many other characteristics of God can also be cited. For Muslims, God is Allah, and the believer's idea of ​​him is formed through his attributes, consisting in (the position) that: there is no deity but Allah, Allah is one, self-sufficient, there is no one equal and similar to Him, He is discerning, kind, knowing, hearing and seeing, highest and closest, giver and mortifying, knowing about all things, mighty and wise. These religious positions in science are not the subject of research, and therefore, from its point of view, they may well be critically examined, questioned, and even ignored.

Problem Statement

The development of science and technology in the modern world significantly changes people's religious and cultural traditions, peoples, and social groups. More and more people are moving away from religion, a religious worldview, preferring atheistic and scientific explanations to religious ones. Culture loses its spiritual component, anti-humanism, intellectualism, technicism come to replace morality, humanism, and machine thinking begins to prevail. In this regard, the publication sets out the task of identifying the current state of the relationship between religion and science, overcoming modern confrontation, establishing their rapprochement, and even achieving a state of complementarity, complementarity.

Research Questions

Religion as a system of knowledge and ritual practices, historically developed in its various forms and preserved to the present, has its subject, methods of study, cognition of God (deities), which form an appropriate worldview, and behavioral attitudes among believers that form the basis of their spirituality. In the context of the development of science, technology, technology, post-industrial or technogenic society, the confrontation of matter and spirit takes on the character of a fierce confrontation, which is replaced by a search for rapprochement and complementarity. Representatives of the clergy, well-known foreign and domestic theologies, are more actively engaged in searching for this complementarity. Representatives of science are also making efforts in this direction, who, dissatisfied with natural sciences' achievements, new technologies, ask questions about the origin of man, the world, and the meaning of life. From the perspective of postmodernism, the answers received in religion and science are not contradictory, directly denying each other; on the contrary, they interact and complement each other.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the work is to identify mutual consistency, mutual complementarity of religion and science, the absence of an insurmountable gap between them, which justifies modernity's rationalism. Modern is trying to eliminate the postmodern paradigm, which calls for overcoming basic positions' rigidity, achieving pluralism and sensitive perception of external multicultural, multicultural, worldview diversity.

Research Methods

When carrying out the research, we used comparative and systemic analysis methods with strict rationalizations and the postmodern worldview associated with global polycentrism, when theoretical and methodological knowledge is replaced by eclectic thinking, coupled with free value orientations fetishizing objects and symbols of a consumer society.

Findings

The French thinker Renan, considering the relationship between science and religion, thinks that science is a consequence of common sense, enlightened and developed by the cause's knowledge. In his opinion, humanity will never overcome religion, people will always be believers. "Never frivolity (under which atheism is considered – the authors), believing in nothing, will play the first role in human affairs" (Renan, 2009). More than a century and a half have passed since this statement, but it turned out to be perspicacious, has not lost its relevance today. Indeed, in the modern world, non-frivolous, non-atheistic values ​​play the first role in human affairs. The acts of billions of believers make a colossal contribution to the development of science, technology, technology, communications, construction, and general in all spheres of modern culture.

The Russian philosopher Ilyin wrote that "religion is, first of all, the path to God." Moreover, science is the path to truth for scientists, which is obtained using proof, either empirically or theoretically. There are contradictory discrepancies between the origin of the world in the Bible and scientific interpretation. Therefore, in modernity conditions, the question of a possible dialogue between religion and science remains open.

The American thinker Francis Collins analyzed the compatibility of science and religion in the light of a new discovery – the human genome. Collins accepted the idea of God, which, in his opinion, is outside our space-time, and therefore inaccessible to science. The second reason why Collins accepted this idea as that God is a supernatural being, that is, a miracle. There are no such concepts in science as miracles, soul, or life after death (Gulkarov, 2011), and therefore science cannot operate with them.

The term "religion" comes from the Latin word "Religare," meaning "to bind." According to Father Alexander Men, it contains contradictory meanings that make it possible to connect man and God's spirit, but it can also be associated with bonds. Paying attention to this, A. Men believed that a person entering the space of religion solves for himself "the dilemma of the fullness of being and slave consciousness." Meanwhile, this decision is associated with the fact that people are powerless due to their limitations, and therefore much remains beyond their physical and spiritual capabilities. Therefore, this "much" for him is mysterious, inexplicable, unknowable, hence his fears, fantasies, faith, uncritical "objectification of the transcendent."

Religion is a key component of any cultural organization. Moreover, religion itself is a system. Any religion is an infinitely complex system (Eliade & Culiano, 2014), which features an independent cultural system structurally organized, including dogma, rituals, clothing, and dietary habits. Religion as a system of beliefs, values ​​, and behavioral patterns, creates a spiritual space, gives people a context of higher meaning, forms the corresponding religious worldview of a person and the nature of his activities. Forward (2003) notes that "religions are highly organized defense systems that contribute to the survival of the human race and give meaning to life" (p. 63).

Religion calls for good, articulates the divine commandments known to all, calling for a positive attitude and behavior. The dissemination of good is not the task of science, and it is not included in its subject area, as wrote the Russian physicist Ginzburg. Ginzburg (2004) argued that religion calls for the observance of specific ethical standards. At the same time, he asserts that savage crimes, terror are committed under Islam's banner, and they blow themselves up. If we turn to Christianity, Buddhism, then there are also many such examples. With the development of science, miracles in religious texts seem clearly unrealistic, or more and more questionable, to say the least.

The modern conflict between religion and science in postmodernism conditions, pluralism of types of knowledge cannot determine the epistemological priority of any of them. Therefore, there is a need for their dialogue, a similar situation. This process is also indicated by the fact that religion's participation in modern sociocultural processes is becoming more and more tangible.

According to religion's definition, Paul Tillich believes that religion should be theologically and philosophically correct while maintaining its identity, adequate to modernity, open to scientific and social progress. For him, there is no chasm between religion and science, and its presence is almost schizophrenia that threatens our spiritual freedom, pushing modern thought to an irrational and forced affirmation or denial of religion (Tillich, 1995).

From the point of view of postmodernism, religion and science are fundamental areas of culture, types of worldview, interacting, complementary with each other. By virtue of this, they are losing their fundamental foundations, the rigidity of their basic positions; the spirit of pluralism and play, a sensitive perception of the external are now important for them.

A postmodern attitude towards religion and science means a denial of essentialism, realism, and fundamentalism (Hart, 2006). The relationship between faith and knowledge in the past was solved within the framework of assessing religion as the lowest type of knowledge, which with the development of science is doomed to disappear. Later, religion and scientific knowledge began to be considered various and legitimate forms of human spiritual activity. Science is not an absolutely objectified knowledge, and however, despite significant scientific progress, humanity is not given the perception of the integrity of the universe. Postmodern culture proceeds from the fact that scientific knowledge and faith are closely interconnected and penetrate each other.

In science, some structures derive knowledge taken on faith as the axioms of certain scientific theories. Such deductive theories, for example, Euclidean geometry, whose axioms are taken for granted, and theorems and consequences are derived from them. Religious systems are not only a set of provisions taken on faith but also some generalizations based on argumentation and proof. For a long time, all knowledge was the science of God. In the modern era, the situation has changed; now human knowledge is decisive, provides information about the world, and people know everything in the world, people know countless things, but they know nothing about God.

Since the Middle Ages, the confrontation between religion and science, priests and scientists had a tough character, far from always scientific ideas, discoveries received support from the Church. In terms of worldview, the religious picture of the world was dominant, and it took many centuries before the scientific picture of the world was recognized. The Church viewed the teachings of Copernicus as undermining the foundations of religion and sought a ban due to the contradiction of this theory to the biblical teaching on the creation of the world. According to the teachings of Copernicus, the Earth is not in the center of the universe but revolves around the Sun along with other planets. Protestantism as an anti-Catholic movement in the 17th century drew a rigid line of demarcation between religion and science and morality, philosophy, and politics.

In the XIX–XX centuries, the process of secularization of society was being carried out, which was reflected in many intellectual movements; most clearly, this happened in the philosophy of positivism and Marxism. J.B. Lamarck and Charles Darwin's evolutionary teachings also refuted the biblical picture of the living people's origin. The teachings of Lamarck and Ch. Darwin asserted that all higher forms of earthly beings originated from certain simple forms as a result of natural transformations. In the XX century, a revision of the Christian understanding of the world, traditional church forms of the Christian religion took place. The state, culture, and science emerged from under his influence, which took an independent path of development, discarding the Church's authority. Peace on Earth, promised by Christianity, has never been established. Scientists, thinkers, who were not satisfied with their existence, began to search for it, and the kingdom of violence could not be eliminated in any way. Scientists use human resources, intellectual capabilities. Humanity has failed to create an order in which there would be no place for violence; on the contrary, the existing order in the past and today turned out to be unjust and cruel.

The fragmented thinking developed by natural science led to the loss of the feeling of world harmony, the impact of the human soul on people and nature was eliminated. Religion has ceased to satisfy the requirements of reason, and science (even medicine) does not want to know either about the soul or the human spirit. Hence, there is a deep discord between them. In parallel, new attempts to resolve the accumulated contradictions between science and theology arose. In 1920, the so-called "dialectical theology" appeared, the origin of which is associated with Niebuhr and Tillich. It is believed that the emergence of dialectical theology is a reaction to the First World War, which undermined the belief in progress, the fundamental premises of liberal theology, which is understanding of the relationship between people and God (Garadzha, 2010).

Some researchers suggest that an analysis of the forms and results of the synthesis of science and religion will make it possible to understand their productivity for science and religion and the development of culture in general. Modern Christian theologians are making very radical attempts to synthesize science and Christianity. In this regard, the modern Christian theologian Yaki's views, who are engaged in the search for a synthesis of Christianity based on achievements in the natural sciences of the 20th century, are of interest (Semenyuk, 2003).

However, this point of view is controversial. The reason is that attempts to integrate religion and science in the culture of postmodernism are associated with their deep crisis in the modern world. Religion is losing its basic parameters, its original purpose; in the West, god-fighting tendencies have arisen (God is dead, the world is without God), not only not overcome, but also further developed. As Feyerabend (2010) notes, in the West, there is an increase in disregard for spiritual values, their substitution with coarse but "scientific" materialism, sometimes even called humanism, a person (professional authors) can solve all problems, a person does not need trust or help from someone another" (p. 27). That is, people themselves are now, as it were, endowed with divine attributes, becoming omnipotent.

The development of science and scientific progress today has led to the fact that the church, according to Feyerabend, retreats before science achievements. However, in science itself, this situation is not observed, although there is considerable opportunism here too. The church today makes concessions to science when it maintains its positions even when it is wrong.

Postmodernity is a consequence of disbelief in modernity, rejection of common sense, moral perfection, rationalism as common values ​​for people. However, at the same time, the virtual Internet culture is taken for granted. By switching channels at any time, Internet culture allows meeting angels and vampires, aliens and cyborgs, preachers who persuade about the imminent end of the world, educated guests of talk shows who seriously discuss the predictions of world-famous soothsayers.

Attempts of scientists and theologians to conduct an interesting dialogue, find common grounds for the problems discussed, and even more so achieve the integration of science and religion in cultural, ideological coexistence. Admittedly, this trend is positive. However, at the same time, it should be noted that this is caused by a deeply spiritual, moral, intellectual crisis prevailing in the modern world, in which postmodern processes, as a solution to these problems, are gaining tangible momentum. However, the currently emerging forms of their synthesis do not give reason to believe that such integration will be successful.

Conclusion

The historical and cultural development of people leads to a noticeable change in understanding the relationship between religion and science. In the Middle Ages, the church ruled over science, subordinating to itself the entire spiritual life of society. At this time, science could not develop independently, was under pressure from the church, and was forced to substantiate religious dogmas. Simultaneously, in the era of the Enlightenment, the situation is changing, the role of science in society is increasing, it claimed power over religion. However, the struggle between science and religion is not over yet; it continues, acquiring new forms. Thus, postmodern culture denies the Bible as the basis of unity and transcendental truth while ridiculing religious fundamentalism and monumentality. Postmodernism is anti-foundational; for it, there is no stable landscape, no unity. Therefore, neither science nor religion for postmodernism is fundamental and not stable in their foundations. Science and religion in the postmodern culture have their specific properties since they are devoid of their various inherent grounds and fundamentals. The search for common grounds for these opposites leads to rapprochement, interaction, complementarity. Postmodern culture is characterized by very diverse forms of integration of scientific and religious worldviews. In the language of postmodernism, the expression of this complementarity is a collage, a combination of disparate elements, asymmetry, some semblance of science and religion at the same time. It is an artificial combination of heterogeneous components, representing anti-basicity, anti-realism.

References

• Eliade, M., & Culiano, I. (2014). Dictionary of religions, rituals, beliefs (2nd ed.). Academic Project.

• Feyerabend, P. (2010). Goodbye reason. AST; Astrel.

• Forward, M. (2003). Religion. FAIR – PRES.

• Garadzha, V. I. (2010). Dialectical theology. New philosophical encyclopedia, in 4 volumes (Vol. 1). Mysl.

• Ginzburg, V. A. (2004). A few notes on atheism, religion and Jewish national sentiment. Vesti.

• Gulkarov, I. (2011). Are science and religion compatible? Continent. Internet newspaper.

• Hart, K. (2006). Postmodernism. FAIR - PRESS.

• Renan, E. (2009). The future of science (3rd ed.). Librokom Book House.

• Semenyuk, S. V. (2003). Transformation of science and religion in postmodern culture [Doctoral Dissertation, abstract]. Rostov-on-Don.

• Tillich, P. (1995). Favorites. Robert C. Kimball (Eds.), Theology of culture. Oxford University Press.