The Scientific Revolution and Enlightenment are best understood as conflicts between faith and reason. This statement is accurate because this time period began the separation of church and state and opened the floodgates for science to begin to become more important in society in the future. While it took some time for science and religion to completely separate, and it did not happen until much later, the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment were extremely important because they created the conflict in the first place. While this time did not completely separate reason and faith, it began to encourage people to think this way.
Until the sixteenth century, no one had really changed the way that the world was viewed, and the universe was studied as a whole instead of focusing on smaller parts (Hause & Maltby 2004, p. 292). Therefore, science had never really made any major discoveries in this way because it was all considered to be universal. This is the reason that the Scientific Revolution was so effective, as no one had ever thought about the world in this way before. To begin this type of study, people began to use the scientific method- a hypothesis that is then tested by an experiment and followed by an explanation or a theory (Hause & Maltby 2004, p. 292). Through this technique many important people began to make very significant discoveries.
The origins of the Enlightenment began with the works of certain thinkers of the time, including Francis Bacon. These scientists and philosophers published works documenting their experiments, hypotheses, and theories. The Scientific Revolution itself was said to be kicked off by the works of Copernicus in the mid-sixteenth century. Copernican theory dictated that the earth actually revolved around the sun, completely discrediting the Catholic notion that the earth was flat and immovable (Henry 2010, p. 39). Another key figure of the Scientific Revolution was Isaac Newton, who is most famous for his discoveries about gravity. These early scientific works led to groups of intelligent thinkers getting together to discuss their views on the world and the discoveries they had made. The Royal Society was formed in Oxford in the 1640’s, and consisted of a group of scientists who would hold regular meetings (Gribbin 2005, p. 125). Some of these meetings were held at Gresham College (Gribbin 2005, p. 128). At these meetings, they discussed nature and the experiments they were doing to prove their theories; they also discussed the works of other academics (Gribbin 2005, p. 126). One of the founders of this society was John Wilkins, who dedicated his time to encouraging people to discuss and carry out scientific experiments; he also encouraged liberal thinking in regards to religion (Gribbin 2005, p. 132).
The leaders of the Scientific Revolution and the Royal Society encouraged people to begin to consider religion in a liberal way. Galileo and Copernican theory stated that religion and science simply did not mix (Henry 2010, p. 39). Their theories went against what the Church had been teaching about the way that God controlled the universe, and offered explanations for reason. Until this time, religion dictated and controlled the way that society worked. The majority of the people automatically believed what religion taught about the creation of the world and instinctively thought of everything in a religious way (Henry 2010, p. 39). The Church worked closely with the monarchy to ensure that all ways of life were devoted to the controlling religion. Throughout history, major religious figures, such as the Popes, served as direct council to the monarch. Additionally, whatever religion the monarch of the time decided to participate in was the decided religion for the entire territory he reigned over. This did not leave much control or freedom of religion for the people living in that area.
At the beginning of this era of science and free thought, the Church dismissed Copernican theory. In 1616, the Pope Paul V ruled against Copernican theory and forbade the teaching or defense of it (Henry 2010, p. 40). Galileo had been a supporter of this theory and had come under fire by the Church for defending it publicly. However, he later was permitted by Pope Urban VIII to publish Dialogue on the Two Chief World Systems in 1632 (Henry 2010, p. 40). The Roman Church consistently had to police the innovations created by natural philosophers and defend the Catholic method, and they had a specific administrative branch that was invented to deal with these issues (Henry 2010, p. 41). At this time, the Church found itself in a position that demanded the constant need for defense against those who were speaking out in the name of science. At this point in time, it was beginning to become evident that faith did not always have the right answers to questions about life and the way the world worked. This represents a point at which people began to realize that religion and science should be separate. Faith and reason could no longer be one unit because what the Church was teaching about the world no longer made sense.
The Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment was a time when people began to be interested in studying the world instead of believing what the Church was telling them. By questioning the world for themselves, people were able to discover the truth about how things worked and question the extent that faith really intervened in their lives. People began to see through science that religion was not the key to life. In this sense, faith and reason were at conflict because they were beginning to lose their connection to one another. Scientific discovery was continuously pushing faith away and proving the truth about the natural world. Essentially, the more people discovered about science and reason, the less people relied on faith to guide their entire lives.
In contrast, there are still many connections between faith and reason that come from this time, as this was a completely new way of thinking. Therefore, many people were still hesitant to completely separate faith and reason and still found ways to connect them in the theme of science. Natural theology is an example of this. Natural theology is a practice through which scientists and philosophers continued their scientific work but kept it in relation to religion; essentially, all of the scientific experiments that were done under natural theology remained consistent in connecting religion and science (Topham 2010, p. 64-65). Through natural theology, scientists and thinkers continued their work as far as it was accepted by the Church. Therefore, natural theology served a “mediating function” to merge religion and science (Topham 2010, p. 65). In addition, some parts of Catholicism dictated that natural law was part of the Bible and that natural theology was the teaching of God (Topham 2010, p. 65).
At this time, natural theology was being used to argue for Christianity and to explain the control of God within the universe. Many people criticized this notion but many people also supported its ties to religion. Natural theology was contested and later argued against by sceptics and critics. David Hume, a Scottish philosopher, argued in the eighteenth century that there was no proof that one single entity had created the universe, as no one had been there to witness it, and that natural theology could not explain reason (Topham 2010, p. 66). Hume argued against natural theology as a foundation for Catholicism and reason, and led the way for many others to do the same.
This is also not to say that philosophers and thinkers that led the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment were not religious themselves. Almost all of these people were very religious and dedicated to their faiths (Henry 2010, p. 39). None of them ever denied that God existed, or that religion was not important. For example, Michael Servetus lived during the sixteenth century and discovered that blood passed through the lungs to get from the right side of the heart to the left (Henry 2010, p. 41). While modern science has proven this is to aerate the blood, at the time Servetus claimed that the purpose of this was for the blood to absorb and take in the Holy Spirit (Henry 2010, p. 41). Therefore, Servetus had created a scientific discovery but still placed it within a religious context, instead of the natural anatomical reasons modern society now knows. This showcases an example of how scientists during the Enlightenment made miraculous and life-changing discoveries, yet still believed in God and were religious. Servetus was later executed by the Church for “defying the Holy Trinity” (Henry 2010, p. 41). In this sense, at the onset of scientific discovery, it can be argued that faith and reason were still directly connected to one another. In Newton’s theory about gravity, God was still situated in the middle and was still recognized as the heart of the creation of the world (Dolnick 2011, p. 308). Newton never attempted to dismiss religion and God’s existence, and actually attempted to explain his theory with religion as a main factor (Dolnick 2011, p. 308). In his greatest and most well known work, the Principia, he praised God as the creator and acknowledged that God is greater than anything in the world (Dolnick 2011, p. 308). He even defended his work in the name of God at one point when it was questioned (Dolnick 2011, p. 310). It was not until later on in history when people began to build on his theories that his work began to be used as a method of disproving God’s creation of the universe.
Another counter argument states that, according to some philosophers, Christianity and the Catholic Church provided a foundation for scientific discovery, especially natural science (Henry 2010, p. 43). Therefore, they state that if it were not for the Church there would be no basis for natural philosophers to start with and they would have had nothing to go from when they created their theories. According to Stephen Gaukroger, “Christianity set the agenda for natural philosophy” (Henry 2010, p. 43). Essentially, natural philosophers took the information about the world that religion and faith had taught people and improved upon those theories. This time period actually caused a conflict between the people because of their religious beliefs and the belief in science. Many people interpreted the works of the scientists and philosophers of the time as people who were attempting to break down religion and go against God (Dolnick 2011, p. 309). The works that were published during this time divided the people into supporters of science and supporters of religion, adding more conflict between the two. This is why it took a long time for scientific thought to become more widely accepted among society.
It was not until the late nineteenth century that the belief that faith and reason do not mix became widely accepted (Henry 2010, p. 39). As stated before, this was still a revolutionary and new concept for the time and many people were conservative about expressing their views or accepting new ones as the truth. Many of the intelligent leaders of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries were executed or imprisoned for what the Church perceived as treason against the Catholic teachings. Modern science considers the position of God to be irrelevant, while the science of this time period takes God into consideration (Henry 2010, p. 42).
In today’s world, science governs many different areas of society, and religion is left as a separate entity. This way of thinking, that science and religion should be separate and religion should not dictate how society is controlled, comes from this time period. Now, religious belief is a personal choice (Henry 2010, p. 39). One might choose to believe in whatever religion they want, and it has no connection whatsoever to the scientific aspect of life. Society has commonly accepted scientific theories and acknowledges many things that were credited to religion during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. However, all of this religious freedom and separation from science is a direct result of the Scientific Revolution and the Enlightenment. Therefore, this time period can best be understood as a conflict between faith and reason.
References List
Dolnick, E., 2011, The Clockwork Universe, Harper, New York.
Gribbin, J., 2005, The Fellowship: Gilbert, Bacon, Harvey, Wren, Newton, and the Story of a
Scientific Revolution, The Overlook Press, Woodstock, NY.
Hause, S & Maltby, W, 2004, Western Civilization: A History of European Society vol. 2,
Thomson Wadsworth.
Henry, J 2010, 'Religion and the Scientific Revolution'. in P Harrison (ed.), The Cambridge
Companion to Science and Religion, Cambridge University Press, pp. 39-58.
Topham, J. R., 2010, ‘Natural Theology and the Sciences’. In P Harrison (ed.), The Cambridge
Companion to Science and Religion, Cambridge University Press, pp. 59-79.
