Auguste Comte, held to a theory of history in which societies pass through 3 stages – religious, metaphysical and scientific (or ‘positive’). Comte coined the term ‘sociology’ and he wanted to diminish the social influence of religion and replace it with a new science of society.
https://twitter.com/IslamScienceNet/status/1363747248505556995
Scientists, intellectuals & social scientists expected that the spread of modern science would drive secularisation – that science would be a secularising force. But that simply hasn’t been the case.
When the attempt is made to use science to advance secularism, the results can damage science.
The thesis that ‘science causes secularisation’ simply fails the empirical test, and enlisting science as an instrument of secularisation turns out to be poor strategy.
The thesis that ‘science causes secularisation’ simply fails the empirical test, and enlisting science as an instrument of secularisation turns out to be poor strategy.
The 19th century also witnessed the inception of the ‘conflict model’ of science and religion.
White’s work, as well as John William Draper’s earlier History of the Conflict Between Religion and Science (1874), firmly established the conflict thesis as the default way of thinking about the historical relations between science and religion.
The historical norm has more often been one of mutual support between science and religion. In its formative years in the 17th century, modern science relied on religious legitimation. During the 18th and 19th centuries, natural theology helped to popularise science.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
