I don't know any great scientist who is also a religious fanatic!

Not necessarily, there are scientists and inventors, and also skilled in religion, example

Avicenna

Where religion calls for science and education

Some times the religious books/literature help and provide secondary evidence to the scientific hypothesis.

Yes, rigid religious prejudices will always lead to failure in attaining the actual scientific attitude.

Fanatics are less likely to attain actual scientific attitude.

There is a difference between inteligence and wisdom. In this question; I think it is about wisdom. If we don't open our heart to love and help people; we cannot have the needed wisdom to use science properly. Without wisdom; intelligent people could use it for destruction.

@Shibabrata Pattanayak

I would like to raise a few points:

First, the question of whether someone is religious or not does not make him or her a better or worse scientist.

Secondly, fanaticism (up to violent fundamentalism) can be seen both in advocating a particular religion, but also in fighting against every religion. The latter was the case in "real" socialism.

Thirdly, the prejudices that someone has and which - perhaps - do not correspond to our ideal of neutral scientific attitudes - must have nothing to do with religion and come from completely different sources, for example, many groups of people with white skin have ethnic prejudices against people with dark skin, fanatically.

Fourthly: fanaticism is not a desirable virtue, but extremely anti-tolerant. It's destroying the Humanum. This has an impact on scientific work in certain areas, in the cultural, humanities and life sciences. A theoretical or experimental scientist, like a physicist, however, regardless of his prejudices and degree of religious fanaticism, will achieve the same results (if he makes no methodological mistakes) as a scientist who is not fanatical.

Fifth: There are scientific attempts to prove religious assumptions (such as: there is a God, there is life after death, etc.). That is nonsense, regardless of whether the scientist is fanatical or not. The basic assumptions of religion or atheism cannot be scientifically proven. They are a matter of faith.

HEIN RETTER

I think every scientist will have some form of religious belief at the end of life...

People with intelligence and wisdom with a passion achieve new scientific discoveries and innovation. Personal preferences may not have much impact on scientific achievements.

In my opinion, scientific temper is always missing from a person for whom religion is supreme.

If we look the activities carried out by religious people in the ancient time, now days their activities and what they have said many years before has proved true, So, religious people can also be scientific.

Sometimes religion helps to attain good scientific attitude

Religion is faith or belief of a portion of global society, scientific attitude is knowledge management of innovative technical means, hence both are independent. Person raising religion(except religious leaders) in secular society is negative in aptitude and may not contribute in any sustainable activity.

Religion is introvert, Scientific attitute is implicitly extrovert/global as understanding of global scientific potential accelerate it

True faith in religion is in most cases agreeable with true scientific knowledge. I have found remarkable associations of biblical truth with scientific truth:

Shape of the earth

Quarantining

Position of the earth etc.

Psycho-mental rigidity can also apply to the scientific approach, concerning the methodical interplay of visible and invisible factors. Kabbalah and science are compatible methods; higher religious wisdom and the scientific method do also fit. Science is too much concerned with (dead) matter and too little with life (living matter); the creative combination of knowledge and wisdom will lead to the pathway of healing men.

Without any doubt, those who suffer from religious prejudice or extremism can not achieve a real scientific position

regards

God Almighty has set us the goal of His creation.

It is the realization of slavery, through the worship of God transcendence and the reconstruction of the earth, and the succession of God transcendent, since our existence is not empty of goals, if we have a task, we found for it. The goal owner moves from opportunity to opportunity, from success to success, and find alternatives and solutions, and who has no goal moves from one problem to another, and find excuses and justifications.

I agree with all claims of religion vs science ...

Science is rational vs religion is faith with least reasoning but needed for uniting people with cause.

So I do not think they converge , take Ayurveda and Veda !!!

We have all sorts of texts different from religious text , so I guess we all know they are different .

Science answers , religious beliefs accepts :) and they are parallel can't join them ...

I will just mention two things, one personal and one that is not: 1) Non-personal- Sir Isaac Newton, the epitome of Science, Logic, Reason and Rationality was a deeply religious person who spent more time studying the Bible and trying to figure out the hidden meanings in it than he did in his scientific research, both theoretical and experimental, 2) Personal: From the age of 7 until the age of 18, we Tzaddukhim spend about four to five hours in the Shul every Saturday discussing a saying of a Hakham from Sefer (Book) Hakhamim or of Wisdom. This allows us to a) the art of discourse, b) think in unconventional ways or outside the box, c) learn how to effectively use reason, logic and common sense (common sense is not always logical or reasonable), d) learn about the different levels to understand the sage's saying and lastly, e) all this activity leads to the mostly unconscious meta-learning or learning to learn. Clearly you can see the advantages of this activity. However, this activity is intimately connected to our religious learning, learning about our history and ancestry. The foundation of this activity is our religion. thanks.

I think it is true but there exist no solution

yes I also think so Dr Sheth sir

Do you think people with rigid religious prejudices fail attain actual scientific attitude ?

People with any rigid prejudices either they are having ethnic, cultural, linguistic, social,caste related, and demographic related origin fail to attain even human becoming attitude; and scientific attitude for them is like far away reality.

I believe this, because of the psychological and social pressure, and the lack of conditions for the success of the correct scientific activity, which sometimes intersects with religious affairs.

The Islamic religion has a different area of scientific concept which is essential for believers. All religions are not accepting the Atheism and fanaticism.

Religion and science are not mutually exclusive. Sir Isaac Newton was an ordained Anglican minister. Due to his superior intellect he was allowed to pursue science. Similarly Dr. Albert Einstein was supposedly a highly spiritual man and yet one of the most brilliant scientists of the 20th century. Spiritual/relgious grounding may actually help center someone and allow the person to pursue things like science which are more logical in nature. Of course there are extremes. When one is obsessed with religion they may tend to give up other dimensions in life like logic and common sense. At the other extreme are "mad" scientists obsessed with science and not too interested in many other things. Most other people can be found somewhere along the line of continuum.

Please refer to:

There is more info can share. The essences of any religious lead science. That's what I know. Especially when that "scientists prove the invisible part of the universe occupies the majority of the universe!". The super power guides the scientists to discover more details about the science facts.

If there is anything against the fact, it's not the "REAL SCIENCE"!

Dear Dr. Frieda Mah,

Conversely, it may be said - if anything against the fact, it is not the "REAL RELIGION" or "IMPROPER ANALYSIS OF RELIGION".

Do you agree?

Thanks.

Dear Dr. Pattanayak,

Sorry that I disagree. The fact can be the science, due to the science can be traced and objectively exist. But, the religious can be invisible intention that is hardly to be explained and/or realized.

Such as I heard that a religious story that a wise-man who killed a baby. It's the fact. However, due to the wise-man can foresee the baby grows up will kill a lot of people. So, the wise-man killed the baby to avoid him killing people. My question is that if it's the real or important analysis of "religious" why the wise-mad do not keep the baby and educate him to not kill people?

Why a religious does not exist kindness?

Very controversial question. Congratulations on encouraging scientific inquiry in this area. In my opinion we have two situations:

(1) technological area - the scientist should have the power to separate well the religious attitudes (if he is a fervent follower) of scientific scientific responses to avoid hindering or inhibiting research.

(2) social and human area - it is more difficult to reconcile these dichotomous attitudes because it will tend to portray their absorbed religious longings and dogmas (a tendency to reproduce concepts) or omit other divergent thoughts.

I am afraid you are right. However, it is only that others can see that, not the religious person.

I know that because we had one such person in our small group. It happened exactly as you described it.

Generally speaking, there is no relationship between faith and scientific attitude. The only thing is that science does not recognize any limits and in science, the truth of things is never absolute and open to fuhrer scrutiny , but often times inbred religious certainty may prohibit scientific inquiry in certain areas. A such, you could say that certain religions may hinder the natural pace of scientific attitudes and endeavors .

I think rigid religious somehow refers to persons who are more conservative and obstinate about their prospective, so they may hesitate to accept the science.

yes fully

Dear Dr. Shibabrata Pattanayak! I believe not every thing in a religion are subject to be tested logically.

The question is inaccurate. Why to limit oneself to religious prejudices when there is a vast spectrum of various prejudices? For experience, my country for 50 years, under Communism, experienced anti-religious prejudices, also at universities. Nowadays, in different societies we observe ideological prejudices, racial prejudices, gender prejudices, age prejudice, disability prejudice, etc. Simply, some people tend to prejudices. Religion has nothing to do with it. This is the issue of individual psychic construction.

Dear Dr. Noori,

It is perhaps to some extent separate discussion. It varies from man to man, culture to culture, religion to religion etc.

As an example- personally, I do not support anything which has no logic behind it.

Thanks.

Yes, the mindset does obstruct.

As technology advanced, we can notice that more than 95% (some said 97% or 99%) of the universe are full of invisible stuff. The True God's power is one of them and maybe play the major role. How can scientists ignore the invisible power in his/her scientific study? If so, it is a close portion study of the universe and it is only fitting for a limited conditions. This is obvious. That's why many scientific studies failed, especially in the medical field.

The interest part is the limited parting portion tries to rule the unlimited part. All of the scientists have a logic thinking. Does it work? When important factors be closed out the door, can the study be success? Ask yourself before you put down the others.

Let's look at the below links:

There are more detailed analysis:

People are surprisingly able to do two things at one time

Dear colleagues,

Customs and prejudices followed by most of us in the name of our own religion are not always some parts of actual religious text.

I know many persons who never read even a part of religious text but blindly follow many customs and prejudices in the name of religion and advocate these to others as the actual religion. Many so called religious priests are of this type.

My question is in these 'blind following' of customs and prejudices in the name of religion.

All religions were started with very strong philosophical views of their contemporary time.

Actual religious customs were having philosophy behind them. But as time progresses, many other persons added many other customs and prejudices in the name of religion for their OWN PURPOSES.

People of the subsequent generations follow these in the name of religion without analysing them logically.

My question is in that particular mind set.

Thanks.

There are definitely limitations for rigid views

Prejudice and superstition are not rational and as such are not conducive to rational cognition of the world.

However, it is worth separating religion from prejudice.

I can not imagine that a religious fundamentalist (regardless of religion) can be both a scientist who considers all pros and cons, respects the views of others and is able to participate in the discussion.

However, I know a lot of scientists who are just religious and in no way do pre-school (nor does it seem to help).

The key word here is "rigid": While there's nothing to necessarily prevent someone with strong religious beliefs from following the principles of the scientific method, if one's religious beliefs are rigid, dogmatic, or inflexibly beholden to some external authority (like some set of scriptures or creeds), then these beliefs will tend to overrule the scientific method's insistence that we remain faithful to what empirical evidence tells us about the world.

The most interesting is the "rigid" ones think that they are "normal" and "Right". Otherwise, the world will be a lot of prettier.

Any religion under divine master keep the base for the development & growth for such devotees for their development of mental growth which moral codes , & ethics for such person their cannot be any prejudices any religious minded devotees .

Such devotees have never any prejudices for any other religious minded person & as such the question of failing scientific attitude does not arise .

This is my personal opinion

I agree with Prof Dr K N Sheth Sir We dont have any remedy

There is no relation, not to forget the virtues of Ibn Sina and Gregor Mendel...others

In my opinion, people with any rigid prejudices, be it religious or not,fail attain actual scientific attitude.

"The greatest and noblest pleasure which men can have in this world is to discover new truths; and the next is to shake off old prejudices."

"Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep insights can be winnowed from deep nonsense."