Ever since the development of the rational brain, human beings have tried to understand the world around them. For the first few millennium, we went about understand the world around us through story and narration. Whether or not you consider yourself religious, it is evident that prominent religious works, such as the Bible of Christianity, the Quran of Islam, and even further back, the ancient Egyptian characters of Set, Osiris, and Horus, served to not only represent religious ideals but also guide our pre-modern humans on how to best live life and approach the necessary uncertainty, suffering, and pain involved. (source)
As Karen Armstrong argues in her NY Times article, these texts were not necessarily meant to be taken at face value. Instead, she asserts, they require a more fluid, mystical understanding, one that places value on the concept and theme rather than the exact detail being used to express that theme. An example would be that one can deduce from the battle between Set, the ancient Egyptian god of evil, and Horus, the ancient Egyptian god of war and Protection, that dealing with evil in our own lives will be harmful, even to a god, as Horus lost an eye while fighting Set.
However, as society developed, and the framework of Christian religion spread across Europe, the need for such texts as a means to guide one’s life decreased. Due to a combination of technological advancements, improved order and societal structure, some of which provided by the framework of religion, prominent thinkers began looking beyond the Bible for answers about our world, specifically the natural world. Great 17th and 18th century scientists such as Isaac Netwon, Galileo, Watt, and Herschel come to mind. Consequently, the nature of science was defined by existing purely in the realm of facts. In science, something is either a true statement or a false statement. This is the rational basis that continues to modern times, where experiments are conducted to test whether or not a hypothesis is false or true. Compared to the nature of religion, which exists rather in the abstract, in the mystical, science offered a much more concrete, undeniably verifiable way of looking at the world, one that continues to this day.
Although many believe the nature of science to be completely independent from that of religion, I disagree. I view both as simply two tools used to help us interpret, understand, and ultimately endure the world around us. Each one has its strengths, it weaknesses, and its purpose in human society and ultimately ourselves.