Hello.
I have not written in a long time. Maybe I would not publish it for a long time. I write because a friend recommended me.
I have commented on Stephen Jay Gould's article entitled "NOMA: Non-Crossing Teaching Fields".
The NOMA article is probably the first of Gould's best-known and most-cited articles. In this article, Gould states that both science and religion have a teaching office for themselves (only themselves); each of them tells us that the other person is not allowed to say anything about the subject area. Accordingly, religion and science are unable to contradict each other or support each other because they refer to separate teaching posts. According to the NOMA, the contradictions that exist between science and religion are caused by the fact that science or religion has illegally outgrown their own magisterium.
This view comes from the Catholic Church; but the article by Stephen Jay Gould, who gave his name to the meeting, is published here. The vision is the easiest way to end the dispute between science and religion in the American scientific community (and in many established churches).
Despite its fame, this article is anything but convincing. It is not possible to limit the realm of religion in a way that does not conflict with science. It is neither possible nor necessary to limit the science of science to a conflict with religion. In fact, there are very influential scientists who believe that the NOMA approach misrepresents the relationship between religion and science and does not solve the problem.
İmage: