Who invented the idea that religion and science conflict?

The idea that science and religion are and always have been in conflict is, it may be surprising to learn, is of quite a recent provenance. Those who have even a passing familiarity with ancient and medieval philosophy (The Rambam's Guide, for example) know that until about a century ago the exploration of the natural worlds was a branch of philosophy termed "Natural Philosophy". In addition, since most educated people were trained in theology, most early scientists were theologically trained, often motived by a religious impulse, and frankly unaware of the thesis that science and religion conflict.  Keppler, Newton, Galileo conceived of their work as being for the sake of revealing  God's Glory among men. Even Darwin started out as a theologically trained and motivated researcher. So when did this change and how?

The concept that science and religion are by nature in conflict is the creation of two men - John William Draper (1811-1882) and Andrew Dickson White, slightly later in the 19th century.

"From Wikipedia, on Draper: "

He did important research in photochemistry, made portrait photography possible by his improvements (1839) on Daguerre's process, and published a textbook on Chemistry (1846), textbook on Natural Philosophy (1847), textbook on Physiology (1866), and Scientific Memoirs (1878) on radiant energy. He is well known also as the author of The History of the Intellectual Development of Europe (1862), applying the methods of physical science to history, a History of the American Civil War (3 vols., 1867-1870), and a History of the Conflict between Religion and Science (1874). The last book listed is among the most influential works on the conflict thesis, which takes its name from Draper's title.".

These men, especially Draper popularized the notion that scientists, the enlightened vanguards of humanity's progress, were always in conflict and suppressed by the obscurantist irrational and primitive men of religion. Draper resorted to the features of polemical writing well known form later Marxist and Communist tracts - intentional misquotation, selective use of sources, use of contemporary historical novels as a historical source, and plain fabrication. Reading Draper is embarrassing, plainly embarrassing. No man of any education can miss the tendentiousness and lack of logic in his book, one of the most popular works of his time and place among the general public. One wonders? It may be that what appealed to the contemporary public was the vitriol with which he poured upon the Catholics and his equally intense and just as unfair adulation of Islam. White wrote his book to defend the establishment of Cornell University as the first non0denominational based American College. While he is s Little more restrained in his approach, he also had a bias and an axe to grind.

Here is another quote:

" Conflict thesis is the theoretical premise of an intrinsic conflict between science and religion. The term was originally used in an historical context: its proponents claim the historical record is evidence of religion's perpetual opposition to science. Later uses of the term may refer to an epistemological rather than historical opposition between religion and science. Both popular and academic texts at times conflate the two meanings and characterize the conflict thesis as both historical and epistemological.

The historical conflict thesis, also known as the warfare thesis, the warfare model or the Draper-White thesis, is an interpretive model of the relationship between religion and science according to which interaction between religion and science almost inevitably leads to open hostility, usually as a result of religion's aggressive challenges against new scientific ideas. The historical conflict thesis was a popular historiographical approach in the history of science during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, but most contemporary historians of science now reject it.It remains a widely popular view in the general public.^".

^"Stephen Jay Gould writes: "White’s and Draper’s accounts of the actual interaction between science and religion in Western history do not differ greatly. Both tell a tale of bright progress continually sparked by science. And both develop and utilize the same myths to support their narrative". And Colin Russell, in a summary of the historiography of the thesis, say that "Draper takes such liberty with history, perpetuating legends as fact that he is rightly avoided today in serious historical study. The same is nearly as true of White, though his prominent apparatus of prolific footnotes may create a misleading impression of meticulous scholarship”.

^******

^{here is  a link to: Draper's introduction.}

^{What remains to be said is that this thesis had a disproportionate effect on popular consciousness, poisoning the research on the true relationship of science and religion well till almost the recent decades. Its fallacy is now well established among the philosophers of religion and White-Draper's work remains as nothing more than a cause for embarrassment for all thinking persons. It remains for us to explore the actual historical relationship between science and religion, so we might be enabled to approach and be guide in the current disagreements on the basis of solid historical understanding.}

^{I close with the following quote: "}

Gary Ferngren (editor). Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002)

While some historians had always regarded the Draper-White thesis as oversimplifying and distorting a complex relationship, in the late twentieth century it underwent a more systematic reevaluation. The result is the growing recognition among historians of science that the relationship of religion and science has been much more positive than is sometimes thought. Although popular images of controversy continue to exemplify the supposed hostility of Christianity to new scientific theories, studies have shown that Christianity has often nurtured and encouraged scientific endeavour, while at other times the two have co-existed without either tension or attempts at harmonization. If Galileo and the Scopes trial come to mind as examples of conflict, they were the exceptions rather than the rule."

Comments

[digital dissertation]

Blogs are good for every one where we get lots of information for any topics nice job keep it up !!!