Faith Versus Science (1)

Content Versus Method
Before discussing faith and science*, I think it's first important to understand the difference between content and method. Content refers to the truth claims someone or something makes. Method, on the other hand, refers to the way that content was created or discovered.

Typically, we use a method to discover or establish our content. We don't normally make claims about reality based on the mere ideas we have in our head. We want them grounded in something outside ourselves.

For example, if I want to write a book on the history of garden gnomes, I'll probably go through some process to formulate the truth claims I want to make or include in my book. I might identify garden gnome experts, read their books, and select the information from these books that I want to include in my book. This process constitutes my method.

In the end, the published contents of my book represent the truth claims I am making about garden gnomes. 

Pretty simple, right? 



Potential for Conflict
With this difference in mind, it is easier to understand the ways in which faith and science may differ. Each may offer different content and each may offer a different method of truth.

This is not to say their content and method will necessarily conflict. Rather, their content and method may compliment one another or occupy entirely separate territory. 

For instance, some people argue that the content and method of science concerns only our observable world (i.e. empirical truth), while the content and method of faith concerns only the un-observable world (i.e. spiritual truth).

If this argument is true, faith and science could not possibly conflict with one another. Here, science deals with observable reality using a method suited for it, while faith deals with un-observable reality using an equally suitable method. 



The Overlap 
Unfortunately, the former thinking is too simple. Sometimes the content of faith and science overlap. When this happens, their methods sometimes overlap as well.

For instance, religious texts and traditions often include claims about the observable world.

Opening up any Bible will demonstrate this pretty quickly. The creation of the world and the history of ancient Israel are reported in the Old Testament; The history of Jesus and the early church are reported in the New Testament; And, finally, observational truths are found throughout the entire Bible (e.g. Proverbs 14:15).

Here, we can see that faith sometimes includes claims about our observable world. It is not restricted to the un-observable spirit world. 



Real Conflict
Because of this overlap with the observable world, we have real potential for conflict between faith and science. If faith dictates a particular version of our observable reality which conflicts with what we observe or discover through science, both can't be right.

For instance, if textual scholars claim that your religious Holy Book has been clearly altered or falsified based on the observable manuscript evidence, this presents a potential conflict between science and your faith. Similarly, if archeologists say the observable evidence they discover contradicts the history presented by your faith, we again have potential conflict. Finally, if scientists claim the earth is billions of years old but your religious Holy Book explicitly or implicitly suggests otherwise, we again have potential conflict.



Resolution
Now, this is not to say these potential conflicts cannot possibly be resolved. The content of science may change or be seen in a different light. Similarly, the content of faith may change or be seen in a different light.

However we handle these conflicts, we must first admit that there is real potential for them to exist. We must also admit that some conflicts may not be resolvable if we are honest with ourselves. There is no way of knowing until it occurs.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*I am using the term science broadly here to refer to any method employed by professionals in a field which has widely been believed to have advanced knowledge of our observable world. In contrast, faith is often only believed by its select constituents to have advanced knowledge. Often this knowledge concerns the unobservable world.