Excerpt from Research Proposal:
The relationship goes beyond any kind of simple reasonable or complicated scientific designs, because it may not be explained through the observances of realities around us. Fantasy and tradition can often be on a single temporal level, with one or the other being generated at different times. As a result, some of the misconceptions were actually born away of a certain traditions, determined by the geographic or perhaps demographic realities of the respective culture. Consist of cases, traditions was born out of a misconception.
An important aspect to be assessed in the distinctions between spiritual myths and scientific designs is the launch of variables and the kind of variables in each case. The faith based myth, particularly the creation misconceptions in different ethnicities, falls in the category of almost holy myths. You can such a distinction among sacred and profane myths or, as Eliade puts it, people “distinguish between sacred myths (cosmogony, creation of the stars, origin of death) and profane stories, which will explain, for example , certain anatomical or physiological peculiarities of animals”
As such, sacred common myths benefit from almost holy variables, meaning these are factors that cannot be proven, tend to be accepted as a result, because of their sacred characteristic. While using scientific models, as different from a sacred myth, each bottom line needs to have a scientific justification and needs to get tied with precedents device objective factors.
Finally, there is also an important similarity that has not really been talked about so far: both equally myths and scientific designs have a revealing target and purpose. Other than explaining realities, in addition they reveal truths, explain the proceedings in the world about and produce new facts. From that perspective, both clinical models and religious misconceptions have an fundamental function which makes them persevere in culture.
The ideas of scientific models and religious misconceptions, with the intermediary notion of your religious model, seem to be based upon entirely distinct purposes, characteristics, objectives and variables. On one hand, a clinical model could be easily transformed if data shows that some of the information can be not correct. With spiritual myths, many of the evidences are generally not taken into consideration, particularly in the case of sacred misguided beliefs. On the other hand, the two scientific models and faith based myths happen to be explanatory musical instruments for the truth around us and, simultaneously, also means through which reality can be created.
Bibliography
1 . McGrath, Alister. 1998. Science and Religion: An intro. Wiley – Blackwell.
2 . Eliade, Mircea. 1963. Myth and Fact. Trans. Willard R. Trask. New York: Harper Row
McGrath, Alister. 1998. Science and Religion: An Introduction. Wiley – Blackwell.
Ibid.
