Yuval Noah Harari defines the relationship between religion and science as complementary, arguing that religion gives superhuman legitimacy to social structures. He believes that science can coexist and collaborate with religion, rather than oppose it, and explores the positive impact that both fields have on each other in modern society.
Science and religion according to Yuval Noah Harari
Yuval Noah Harari begins Chapter 5 with a comparison between traditional mythology or religion, which is a story of the past, and science, which is a story of the present. He argues that the emergence of scientific theories has created a different world from the one in which traditional myths were wrapped up. This may lead us to think that myths have been replaced by scientific facts, but he argues that science has actually strengthened the control of mutual subjective reality, making some myths and religions stronger than ever. In this respect, we need to consider that the relationship between science and religion is not simply antagonistic, but can sometimes play a complementary role. While science focuses on human curiosity and practical problem-solving, religion has served to fulfill human moral and spiritual needs and to strengthen social solidarity. In the end, the relationship between science and religion becomes blurred, leading to a new definition of religion, which he defines as not a belief in supernatural forces or a belief in God, but something that gives superhuman legitimacy to human social structures.
Yuval Noah Harari went on to say that there are two interpretations of the relationship between religion and science: one is that religion and science are allied and that science has overwhelmed religion, and the other is that science and religion are completely separate. However, he refutes the former by arguing that in order for science to create well-functioning institutions, it needs the help of religion to explain human behavior that science cannot explain. He also countered the latter by arguing that religion has a close relationship with science because it provides ethical judgments that are embedded in factual claims. He argues that science and religion are often mistakenly viewed as different truth-seekers, when in fact, neither is interested in truth and can therefore easily compromise, coexist, and collaborate. This suggests that religion and science can coexist in the modern world while respecting each other’s territory. Both areas have changed with the development of humanity, and modern people are finding a balance between the logic of science and the beliefs of religion. But can we accept Yuval Noah Harari’s definition of religion? And is the relationship between science and religion a friendly one?
Definition of religion
As mentioned earlier, Yuval Noah Harari defined religion as “something that gives superhuman legitimacy to human social structures. But is this a good definition for the word ‘religion’?
First, the dictionary definition of religion is “a cultural system that seeks to resolve the anguish of human life and to find the ultimate meaning of life through belief in a god or supernatural absolute or power. Yuval Noah Harari has argued against this definition, saying that religion is man-made and that defining it as “belief in God” is problematic because it is a social function, not whether there is a God or not. However, I think this is a flawed argument. Religion may be human-created, but it is based on a god or supernatural absolute or power, and it seeks to guide human society on the right path based on the teachings of the god or absolute. Religion has played an important role in helping humans pursue inner peace and a moral life. In this sense, religion is more than just a social function; it is a process of raising and answering deep questions about human existence and the meaning of life. For example, in the case of Christianity, the Bible, although written by humans, is based on the teachings and beliefs of God or Jesus, and provides guidance on how individuals should live and how human society should develop.
I also think that Yuval Noah Harari’s definition is very broad in scope. If we define religion as something that gives us a superhuman sense of legitimacy, then it can include a country’s system, ideas, and even the country itself. Yuval Noah Harari’s definition is that religion is something that serves as an explanation for our behavior that we cannot explain scientifically, so the scope of religion is infinitely broader. Therefore, I think it is more appropriate to define religion as “a cultural system that resolves the anguish of human life and seeks the ultimate meaning of life through belief in a god or supernatural absolute or power,” as defined by the National Language Institute. The definition of religion can change depending on the values of the society and time, and today we are faced with a variety of religious perspectives and new interpretations. Nevertheless, the core elements of religion are still the belief in the divine and the process of exploring the ultimate purpose of human existence.
The relationship between science and religion
Yuval Noah Harari has argued that religion and science are not separate concepts, but complementary: religion fills in the gaps by providing justifications for phenomena that science cannot explain, and science supports religious dogma by providing factual statements within ethical principles. You might think that this argument is not quite right. For example, Darwin’s 19th-century theory of evolution directly refuted the Bible’s claim that God created humans, leading to the idea that science threatened religion. But in reality, Darwin’s theory only refuted a small part of the Bible, and other parts of the Bible have real scientific evidence, so it didn’t have much of an impact. Furthermore, as Yuval Noah Harari has argued, all religious stories contain practical guidelines and factual statements as well as ethical ones, so they evolve as science refutes or supports them. That’s why I think Yuval Noah Harari is right about the relationship between science and religion. Science and religion have historically clashed and influenced each other at the same time, and in the modern world, they have shown the potential to work together in ways that recognize and complement each other’s limitations. Humans have lived with and around religion for a long time, but as science has advanced by leaps and bounds, religion has become less important and its meaning more uncertain. Nevertheless, I believe that science and religion positively influence each other and that we are where we are today because of them.
