Final Argumentative Essay Assignment
Phil 156.003
Summer 2013

Carl Sagan’s view of The Difference
Between Science and Religion is Not Accurate

Carl Sagan was an American scientist who died from pheunmonia at a relatively early age. He studied astronomy, astrophysical science and cosmology. Wrote several articles that popularized science and science communication in astronomy and natural science. Sagan was one of the few who brought science to the forefront and helped untangle the issues of science versus the issues of religion. Needless to say, these controversies created much controversy amongst scientists. Much disagreement was due to his dismissal of credit of a god-like creator and glorification of rationality. He was applauded for his use of logic and inspiration but criticized for his lack of distinction between assumptions and facts. Based on these factors, it is easy to find fault with his arguments because his scientific beliefs are based on solid provable scientific data while his religious beliefs are based on faith and data lacking evidence. Sagan’s view of the difference between science and religion cannot then be accurate. Sagan was probably best known for his television series “Cosmos A Personal Voyage” Developed while at Cornell University. Although he liked to write for professional scientists, he also enjoyed writing for the general public. He made frequent visits to TV talk shows. In the books listed below he presented scientific theories, philosophies, and scientific inquiries on social, political, religious, and historical events. Sagan received numerous awards for his work. It is fascinating to see that Sagan, in his book The Demon-Headed World,” He clearly indicates that we should always use logic and reasoning for decisions although he believed strongly in extraterrestrial life without proof that it existed (Sagan, 2006:114 & Sagan & Shklovskii, 1966:418). He justified his belief by utilizing methods of science and fusing them from different fields. “Sagan thinks that science replaces religion’s function of temporarily filling gaps in our understanding, but leaves religion’s benevolent social roles intact.” (Carl Sagan's Religion of Science - Aware ness's blog. (N.d.). Retrieved from http://davidhuerta.typepad.com/blog/2010/07/carl-sagans-religion-of-science.html). Sagan has made a unexpected connection between religion and science. He sees religion more as a form of sociology than a science. He feels that religion does not critically examine its evidence and each concept is as good as the other. Personally, I do not see how there is a way to do this. In the previous paragraph, I attempted to show how the two sciences can be alike and at the same time be so different. I find more differences than similarities between the two. These discussions have taken responsibility for long periods of time, and they still seem to function as two different sciences. There are many examples of how these two sciences have proven to be changed even within them. Scientists such as Newton, Pasteur, and Einstein have come up with specific theories not ever duplicated. Even set instruments have been developed to prove their belief. In the religious sector, we have volumes of the time that show how different faiths have practiced many different life structures.

There are many practices, and that appear to be closely related, and some are majorly different in beliefs and intensities of differences and similarities. There are occasions when religion causes us to obtain information without questioning its validity, so we just redesign. The one that comes to mind is the movement that Sagan alludes to one faction that redefined the “end of the world” when 1914 Passed without the world physically ending. (3, p. 284). According to
Scripture the Bible uses this phrase “last days” to refer to the conclusion of time leading up to a