Abstract
<p><em>In a recent paper, Kowalski and Mrdjenovich (2017) advised against indiscriminate dichotomization. We looked at nature vs nurture, reductionism vs holism, and several of the ways the scientific pie could be sliced in two pieces, basic vs applied, physical science vs social science, etc.</em><em>,</em><em> arguing that focusing on one or the other of two dichotomous choices often deflects attention from a more fertile intermediate ground where more useful answers might be found, and that a better classification scheme than the basic/applied opposition would depend on the nature of the question being asked and the manner in which an answer is sought. We even ventured to include science vs poetry, recognizing that the two are often taken to be the very embodiment of polarity, the cold of rationality vs the heat of emotion. Thus we approached, but did not directly confront the elephant in the room: Science vs Religion. I attend to this now.</em></p>
Highlights
I do not dwell on S&R during this period, but note that much of 19th century history was dominated by the works of the two American polemists John William Draper (1874) and Andrew Dickson White (1896) who emphasized the warlike nature between S&R
Ronald Numbers (2009) describes 25 myths about science and religion, and he claims, “The greatest myth in the history of science and religion holds that they have been in a state of constant conflict” (p. 1). He attributes this to the influence of Draper and White, but concludes, “Historians of science have known for years that White’s and Draper’s accounts are more propaganda than history” (p. 6)
The antagonistic view of S&R dominated most of the 19th century and this, while persisting in some quarters to the present day, has admitted other characterizations to be considered as well
Summary
Journal of Research in Philosophy and History Vol 1, No 1, 2018 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/jrph ISSN 2576-2451 (Print) ISSN 2576-2435 (Online). Kowalski1* 1 Health Sciences and Behavioral Sciences Institutional Review Board, University of Michigan, MI, USA * Charles J Kowalski, Health Sciences and Behavioral Sciences Institutional Review Board, Building 520, North Campus Research Complex, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor MI, 48109, USA
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
