“Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind.”

The title of this blog is a quote from Albert Einstein, who was himself a man of faith. Many other men of science were also men of faith. The different thinking styles that go into religion compared to that of science is often where conflict arises. Faith is based on trusting what you cannot see. While science is based on facts and believing what you can see. I think it also goes to say that if you are scientist that believes in God then you are less likely to see a conflict between the two, rather then a scientist who doesn’t believe in God.


When I think about faith and science, the debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham comes to mind. In this two-hour debate on creationism vs. evolution; basically arguing faith and science. It brings up many points of debate like Noah’s ark or the Grand Canyon and each Bill and Ken give their view. Bill is the science and logical side of the debate, while Ken uses the Bible to explain.

Personally I can see where the differences in the way of thinking between religion and science can create tension. In addition, there are many events such as Noah’s ark or the date of the creation of the Earth that have clear facts proving one way. While the Bible and religion says different. It would be conflicting for a scientist to believe in the Noah’s ark even with the scientific facts disproving it. With that said, many great scientists in the past have found a balance. So it is possible to find a middle ground between religion and faith and still achieve greatness.


Anastaza Hicks


6 thoughts on ““Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind.”

  1. I liked this! I have always wanted to see that Bill Nye debate. I’m glad it was the short version, because honestly I would get bored. I think personally that science and faith can go hand in hand. It’s interesting to see both sides because I’m not a scientist and will never claim to know what exactly is going on in those areas of interest.
    Jennifer Gifreda


  2. Well I’m personally not exactly religious but I don’t think it would be completely hard to integrate both science and religion if I wanted to. It’s easy for both sides to have obvious bias, which can lead to ignorance. I think being open to both religion and science can be beneficial.

    Kris Kowalk


  3. I watched this debate and found it honestly rather disappointing. Ham based his argument on testimonials of scientists, whose proof was often that the events “could” happen. I think this is a great topic to have a discourse on, but I wish the religion side of the argument could have had a stronger case.

    Tessa Ward


  4. This was a really interesting debate. I agree that it definitely is possible to find a middle ground. I think it’s just really hard for people to change their views once they are set in stone.

    Megan DeBanto


  5. I find it interesting that when we debate over science and religion, the only religion we seem to debate over is one of Abrahamic origins (Islam, Judaism, and namely Christianity). There are many other religions that welcome science, and both can exist harmoniously. Perhaps the question of scientific and religious compatibility relies more heavily on the religion one chooses for themselves, than the idea of religion as a whole.

    Diana Bolton


  6. Your post was very interesting and I liked the quote from Einstein as your title. I never actually saw the whole debate, but I did find the short clip interesting. I think that faith and science can go hand in hand, and it doesn’t have to be separate.

    Jane Gripshover


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s