Dialogue on science and religion

  1. Lemma
  2. Dialog despre stiinta si religie
  3. Romanian
  4. Stavinschi, Alexandra
  5. Modes of interaction - Ecumenism and dialogue - Education, Science and Orthodoxy - Various approaches to the problem of correlation between science and theology
  6. Mosoia, Catalin [Author]. Dialogue on science and religion
  7. Dialogue on science and religion
  8. interdisciplinary dialogue - interreligious dialogue - language

    1. This book is based on real conversations between the author, Catalin Mosoia, an orthodox scientist and journalist, and his 28 interlocutors, who are prominent figures in the field of religion, philosophy or science.

      The respondents are from Romania, Italy, Australia, France, USA, UK, Netherlands, South Africa and are professionally interested in this type of dialogue. Many of them are also orthodox.

      The volume provides an excellent overview of the subject thanks to a very clear and stimulating set of questions, which are the same for all the interviewees. Here are their names: G. Memelis, St. Trausan Matu, P. Clayton, B. Nicolescu, J. Staune, I. Chirila, M. I. Stavinschi, I. Macri, A. Mosoia, S. A. Mihalache, G. Calina, W. Danca, R. Poli, C. V. Negoita, G. F. R. Ellis, J. McGrath, M. Sunjic, R. J. Russell, J.-A. de Clermont, D. Alexander, W. Drees, E. Weislogel, R. Cole-Turner, T. Magnin, A. Jackelen, E. Marcus, J. van Breda, E. Solunca.

      These are the ten questions that were asked:

      1. What was the most decisive factor in choosing a career in science (theology, philosophy, sociology)?

      2. What did religion (science) mean for you? How did you develop an interest in religion (science)?

      3. What are the conditions that favour the dialogue between religion and science?

      4. With what would you compare the dialogue between science and religion?

      5. To what extent would you benefit from a real dialogue between science and religion in your professional activity?

      6. What are the risks posed by the dialogue between these two fields of knowledge?

      7. What are the major difficulties that hinder the beginning of a dialogue between science and religion?

      8. When do you think that a common language between science and religion will be outlined?

      9. Who would benefit from the dialogue between science and religion?

      10. What are the immediate effects of the dialogue between science and religion?

      To the question regarding the conditions which favour the dialogue between science and religion, the majority of the interviewees emphasized the need of being open to the interlocutor, in an attempt to give them the chance to communicate their view of the truth; the underlying assumption is the belief that there is no ownership of the truth on either side of the dialogue. In the same line, other answers highlighted the availability of the partners, the receptiveness towards the the interlocutor and their opinions, the mutual respect and the confidence that the other has something valuable to teach. In other words: "the simplest and also the most necessary condition is the understanding that each of them [science and religion] has something to learn from each other. If either of the two partners already believes that they own the whole truth, no dialogue is ever possible. Both must be humble enough to admit that still many interesting surprises can occur on both sides" (Roberto Poli, p. 114). Others refer to the conditions at the macro level, linking them to a tolerant or relaxed society as far as religion is concerned. Some of the answers consider that a real exchange is only possible if we are aware of our limits and if we succeed in finding a common language.

      The question number eight, on the issue of common language, touches upon a key-point in communication. Language is closely related to cognition and has a major role in shaping the way we think. We see the world as suggested by the linguistic categories that we have acquired. It is striking to see that most of the co-authors are skeptical regarding the existence, but also the possibility of developing in the future, a common language. Nevertheless, they consider that the dialogue between religion and science is still possible. Only R.J. Russel and G.F.R. Ellis follow a slightly different line, suggesting that it is not necessary to build a new language, as the language of philosophy is sufficient to successfully provide the interface between science and religion with the appropriate concepts. There are also authors who claim that such a language already exists (Basarab Nicolescu), who are optimistic that in a few decades there will be one (Gelu Călina), or who more cautiously affirm that the common language is taking shape while we keep advancing in the interdisciplinary dialogue.

      To find out which are the effects of the dialogue between science and religion means to discover the aims of the authors in their own endeavours. Therefore the last question is particularly revealing. The answer often mention the ideas of revaluing and transforming: "The main effect lies in helping our fragmented society to bring life in the spotlight. We respect each other more - Christian,s Muslims, Hebrews, the great oriental traditions - because we realize that we are all searching for answers to many of the same questions. "(Roland Cole-Turner, p. 183)