There is a neurological approach to the apparent conflict between science and religion. Human brain is made up of the left and right hemispheres which are mainly specialised in analytical and empathetic thinking. Empathetic thinking can lead to more altruistic behaviours due to its ability to see things in a holistic manner. While analytical thinking is essential for scientific reasoning, it explains partly the apparent conflict between science and religion. Humans are built to engage and explore both networks. However, excessive focus on one of the networks can suppress the other and both may create two extremes. It is possible that under right circumstances, religious belief can facilitate even creativity and insight in scientific pursuit too. This explains why the most gifted scientists in history always reconciled between science and their religious belief. The book by Baruch Aba Shalev, 100 Years of Nobel Prizes, studied the religious background of the 654 Nobel laureates from 1901 to 2000. Not surprisingly, 90 percent of the Nobel laureates were followers of one of the 28 religions. 10.5 percent of the Nobel laureates were atheists, or agnostics.

Examining the relationship between belief in God or a universal spirit with measures of analytic thinking and moral concern was the objective of a recent research by researchers at Case Western Reserve University and Babson College in the US. In eight different experiments, each involving 159 to 527 adults, it was consistently shown that there is a correlation between religiosity of the persons and the moral concern shown by them. The frequency of prayer and other spiritual practices had a positive impact upon empathetic behaviours. It did not imply that other social behaviours like church dining or belonging to a religious organisation facilitated such acts of altruism.

The researchers showed that analytic thinking is likely to discourage spiritual thinking. Their data showed that empathy is foundational to religious belief than analytic thinking is for lack of faith. They do warn the dangers of ignoring analytical thinking. At the same time they show that religious faith can be an effective route to promote emotional insight. In overall, it was established that religious belief has a greater role to motivate one to compassion and social inclusiveness. The principal investigator of the research Jack claimed that science-faith conflict can be avoided by following simple rules: “Religion has no place telling us about the physical structure of the world; that’s the business of science. Science should inform our ethical reasoning, but it cannot determine what is ethical or tell us how we should construct meaning and purpose in our lives.”

Augustine Pamplany CST