Do science and religion give us the same kind of knowledge, thus competing with one another, or do they give us different kinds of knowledge, and function in different and complementary arenas? This debate draws on the essays we read by Galileo and Hume. [You may also find it helpful to read ahead in McFague’s essay.] Specifically, Galileo argues that science and religion provide different kinds of knowledge and do not compete, while Hume evaluates religion on empiricist grounds (those used in science) and finds it lacking. Take a position on this question and defend your view with logical reasoning. Demonstrate that you understand Galileo’s and Hume’s views (and McFague’s if you choose to engage with her). Remember that you will need to consider an intelligent opposing viewpoint, so make sure your viewpoint is debatable and something with which another philosopher could disagree.
Present your position on a question and defend your view with reasoning. Then, you will present an opposing view and reasons in favor of it, then respond to that opposing view.