رابطه علم و دین: تفاوت میان نسخه‌ها

[[پرونده:Religion of Nobel Prize winners between 1901 and 2000.png|چپ|بندانگشتی|200px|ادیان برنده جایزه نوبل بین ۱۹۰۱1901 وتا 2000.<ref name="Nobel prize">Baruch A. Shalev, ''[https://books.google.co.il/books?id=3jrbmL-DgZQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=100+Years+of+Nobel+Prizes&hl=iw&sa=X&ved=0CB0Q6AEwAGoVChMIt8rKpZH6xgIVRVgUCh0Y1Qi9#v=onepage&q=100%20Years%20of%20Nobel%20Prizes&f=false 100 Years of Nobel Prizes]'' (2003),Atlantic Publishers & Distributors , p.57: between 1901 and 2000 reveals that 654 Laureates belong to 28 different religion. Most 65.4% have identified Christianity in its various forms as their religious preference.

حوادثی که در اروپا اتفاق افتاد همچون مورد گالیله، که همراه با انقلاب علمی و دوره روشنگری بود محققانی چون ویلیام دراپر را به فرض نظریه تعارض رهنمون کرد که بر اساس آن علم و دین به لحاظ روشی، واقعیت و سیاسی در سرتاسر تاریخ با هم در تعارض بوده‌اند. نظریه تعارض علم و دین باور بسیاری از دانشمندان معاصر همچون [[ریچارد داوکینز]]، [[استیو واینبرگ]] و کار سگان نیز هستاست و برخی از خلقت گرایان نیز به نظریه تعارض گرایش دارند. در حالیکه نظریه تعارض در میان عموم مردم مشهور و معروف مانده‌است در میان بیشتر مورخان علم وجهه خود را از دست داده‌است.<ref name="Russel, C.A. 2002 7">{{Cite book|title=Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction|publisher=[[انتشارات دانشگاه جانز هاپکینز|Johns Hopkins University Press]]|year=2002|isbn=0-8018-7038-0|page=7|quote=The conflict thesis, at least in its simple form, is now widely perceived as a wholly inadequate intellectual framework within which to construct a sensible and realistic historiography of Western science|author=Russel, C.A.|editor=Ferngren, G.B.}}</ref><ref name="Shapin1996">{{Cite book|title=The Scientific Revolution|url=https://archive.org/details/scientificrevolu00stev|publisher=[[University of Chicago Press]]|year=1996|isbn=|page=[https://archive.org/details/scientificrevolu00stev/page/n210 195]|quote=In the late Victorian period it was common to write about the ‘warfare between science and religion’ and to presume that the two bodies of culture must always have been in conflict. However, it is a very long time since these attitudes have been held by historians of science.|author=Shapin, S.}}</ref><ref name="Brooke1991">{{Cite book|title=Science and Religion: Some Historical Perspectives|publisher=[[انتشارات دانشگاه کمبریج|Cambridge University Press]]|year=1991|isbn=|page=42|quote=In its traditional forms, the conflict thesis has been largely discredited.|author=Brooke, J. H.}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|title=Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction|publisher=[[Johns Hopkins University Press]]|year=2002|isbn=0-8018-7038-0|page=x|quote=... while [John] Brooke's view [of a complexity thesis rather than an historical conflict thesis] has gained widespread acceptance among professional historians of science, the traditional view remains strong elsewhere, not least in the popular mind.|author=Ferngren, G.B.|editor=Ferngren, G.B.}}</ref><ref name="scientists religion">{{Cite journal|title=Conflict Between Religion and Science Among Academic Scientists?|last=Ecklund|first=Elaine Howard|journal=Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion|issue=2|doi=10.1111/j.1468-5906.2009.01447.x|year=2009|volume=48|pages=276–292|author2=Park, Jerry Z.}}</ref><ref>{{Citation|last=Harrison|first=Peter|title=Newton's Apple and Other Myths about Science|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=pWouCwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=newton%27s+apple+and+other+myths+about+science&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjSkdPPiPrKAhVINSYKHZ5nAj8Q6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=newton%27s%20apple%20and%20other%20myths%20about%20science&f=false|year=2015|pages=195–201|publisher=Harvard University Press|article=That religion has typically impeded the progress of science|editor-last1=Numbers|editor-first1=Ronald L.|editor-last2=Kampourakis|editor-first2=Kostas}}</ref>