A Reasonable Faith

For a century or more there has been a debate between science and faith.  Statements like, "Science has shown..." are pitted against "God says...", in both spoken and written coversations.  Rarely, are the two statements shown to be complimentary instead of contradictory.  But are these two statements always at odds?  I propose that both science and faith can lead to truth.

How are science and faith used to find truth?

Let's define science and faith.  Science is the study of the world around us through use of the scientific method.  "Faith is not to have a perfect knowledge of things; therefore if ye have faith ye hope for things which are not seen, which are true."(Alma 32:21)  We will use these definitions for the rest of the discussion.

Alma, a Book of Mormon prophet, explains the process for obtaining knowledge through faith.  This process parallels the scientific method.  The list below outlines the parallels between Alma's process (taught in Alma 32) for obtaining knowledge through faith, and the scientific method.  

1. Learn the doctrine of Christ (verse 23)  - Form a hypothesis based on physical or mathematical observation
2. Experiment upon the words of Christ (verse 27) - Test the hypothesis through experimentation
3. Observe how following Christ begins to change your life for the good (Verse 28-29) - Make observations about the experiment that confirm or refute the original hypothesis
4. Continue to experiment on the words of Christ (verse 30) - Continue to test the hypothesis to ensure that the results are correct
5. Conclude that the word of Christ is truth (verse 30-33) - Conclude that the hypothesis is truth or false
6. Continue to experiment on the words of Christ (verse 34) - Continue the search for knowledge through application of the scientific method

For further understanding, I encourage you to go to http://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/alma/32?lang=eng to read the verses above.  Also, in the New Testament the Savior invites us to act on His words to know that they are true (see John 7:17).

What if I just don't have a lot of faith?

Faith is a principle that we all use, whether religious or not, whether scientists or not.  We must act without absolute knowledge that what we are doing will lead to the intended results.  Most of the time we act in faith without even thinking about it.  However, how we exercise faith will determine whether we will be happy or sad in this life.   

Faith in an infinitely wise and loving Heavenly Father leads us to a happier life.  If we want to know whether our Heavenly Father exists and whether his word is truth, we can read his scriptures, communicate with him through prayer, and then apply what we learn to our lives.  If the fruits of our inquiry are happiness (not the same thing as fun), then we know that what we have learned is good.  As we listen to our heart, we will know which fruits are good and which fruits are evil.  Through this application of faith, we will come to a knowledge that God lives and that He loves us, that Jesus Christ died for our sins, and that He calls prophets today to guide his people.   

Faith that is exercised in our worldly pursuits can lead to happiness, too.  We need to observe which actions make us happy, which actions are fun but then lead to sorrow, and which actions immediately lead to sorrow.  As we conscientiously apply this principle we will find happiness..

What if there are specific scientific or religious assertions that seem to contradict each other?

While contradictions between scientific assertions and religious assertions exist, we must ask ourselves some questions before making a final judgement.  Does the particular assertion being made impact my life directly?  Does science have the tools to adequately explore a problem, and if so, is there a consensus?  Are the religious opinions I hold backed up by scripture, prophetic witness, and the Spirit?  Is the "scientific" assertion being made based on science or simply on reasoning?  Are the terms defined the same between the scientific and religious assertions?        

Many scientific discoveries or religious beliefs don't affect how we live our lives.  Most people don't change their behavior based on whether God created the world over millions of years or whether it was created in 6 earth days.  The important thing is that God created the world.  Most doctors don't change how they study medicine based on descriptions (or lack thereof) of how Christ healed people.  If Christ healed with a power that is unknown to them it doesn't hinder them from doing the best they can with the understanding they have.  If a conflict doesn't lead to a change in our lives we should not let conflict destroy our belief in science or in God.  Also, we should not to fixate on these topics to disprove or prove once and for all, that we are right and the other guy is wrong.

Science is a dynamic and ever changing field and is currently discovering new truth.  Each year hundreds of thousands of articles are published that outline new discoveries, that confirm old discoveries, and/or disprove long held theories.  Our understanding grows as new tools are discovered and new studies are performed.  We should be slow to throw away or faith over questions that have not been fully explored in science.  Also, we should be skeptical of long-held religious opinions that seem to be soundly disproved using science.     

Many of our religious beliefs are not universal truth, but personal belief.  These beliefs can come from our upbringing, from popular religious consensus, personal revelation, or from personal interpretation of the word of God.  In some cases, we apply these beliefs to our family, friends, and anyone else who will listen.  We even go as far as to reject any scientific claim that contradicts our belief.  We should not reject the truth that science provides because of strongly held personal beliefs that have not been established by multiple spiritual witnesses (2 Corinthians 13:1), and we should recognize that sometimes the Lord reveals to us things that are only for our personal benefit.  

Sometimes reasoned arguments are used as pseudo-science to justify an opinion.  Science is based on careful experimentation and observation; often, grounded in mathematical explanations of physical phenomenon.  Pseudo-science reasoned arguments take this science and then reason to a new conclusion.  Reasoning is an important part of the decision making process, but, it cannot be used in place of science and faith.  Instead, reasoning is used to look beyond the current data to create new hypothesis.  These new hypothesis then can be tested using the scientific method or faith.  

To compare two ideas a common vocabulary must be used.  Too often, science and religion use different words to describe the same thing and use the same word to describe different things.  While I will not attempt to define these words, an honest comparison between seemingly opposed ideas must include a definition of the key words and phrases for the ideas being examined.  Without this foundation the argument will be rife with confusion.

What's next?

I acknowledge that there are other arguments both for and against the co-existence of science and religion, and that the arguments presented here are not full developed.  I also acknowledge that I am not perfect in accepting truth, wherever it is found.  But, I hope that you can begin to deeply think about the scientific method and faith, and how they relate to one another.  In my humble opinion they are not adversaries, but companions in the quest for truth.  In the end, there are many questions that will have to wait until after this life to be answered.