Q&A: Religion and Science
Religion and Science
Question
Hello, honorable Rabbi.
Does religion contradict science and thereby not “permit” a person to adopt certain positions? I assume you’ll answer no and say that religion speaks about values and science about facts, or something along those lines (please correct me if I’m wrong). But if a purely logical proof were to appear for the nonexistence of God, or for His non-unity, wouldn’t that overshadow the specific commandments that command us to believe this? Thank you very much.
Answer
Religious faith does relate to facts, but very few of them. The main one is the existence of God. If there were a proof or a good argument that there is no God, then of course one should abandon the faith.
Discussion on Answer
No. Because the validity of those values derives from facts (the Torah was given) + reasoning (that there is an obligation to obey God).
The more correct question is whether our obligation to observe the commandments is itself a naturalistic fallacy.
Absolutely not. If someone showed me that hitting a person doesn’t hurt him, then I would abandon the value of not hitting him. The naturalistic fallacy says that facts are a necessary basis for values, but not a sufficient one. To reach a value conclusion, you need a factual basis plus a bridging value assumption. Without the facts, the value conclusion collapses.
To put it differently: I’m not abandoning any value, since one still ought to fulfill God’s command. It’s just that factually there is no God, and therefore there is no place to actualize that value. Exactly as I am not abandoning the value of not causing pain to another, but if hitting him does not cause him pain, then the practical expression of the value changes.
Isn’t that the naturalistic fallacy? Abandoning values because of a fact?