Idan aka yi la'akari da duk waɗannan ƙananan bambance-bambance, yana da wahala a tabbatar da cewa NOMA (non-overlapping magisteria) za a iya amfani da shi a ko'ina, kamar yadda yake da wahala a halatta ra'ayin New Atheism game da rikici. Game da waɗannan batutuwa, yana da muhimmanci shugabannin addini na Kiristoci da Musulmi su san muhawarorin New Atheism, domin hakan zai ba su damar mayar da martani a kansu ta hanyar bincike tsakanin fannoni daban-daban wanda ya haɗa da, amma bai takaita ga, fahimtar tarihin kimiyya ba. Saboda haka, zai iya zama da amfani a fara tantance wasu daga cikin manyan da'awowin New Atheists. Grayling ya rubuta cikin wani bayani mai ban mamaki da ya sauƙaƙa tarihi fiye da kima cewa:

Considering all these nuances it is difficult to affirm generalisability of NOMA (non-overlapping magisteria) just as it is difficult to legitimise the New Atheist treatment conception of conflict. On these points, it is vital that Christian and Muslim faith leaders are aware of New Atheism’s arguments, thereby allowing them to counter them through inter-disciplinary research that includes, but is not limited to, understanding the history of science. Consequently, it may be useful to initially assess some of the New Atheists’ overarching claims. In a striking oversimplification of history Grayling writes:

Duk abin da mutum zai iya tunani game da tarihin dangantaka mai cike da sarkakiya tsakanin kimiyya da addini, abu daya ya bayyana a fili: cewa su biyun suna gogayya wajen neman gaskiya game da asalin duniya, yanayin mutum, da ko duniya tana nuna shaidar tsarin hikima mai zane (Grayling, 2014, p.108).

Whatever else one might think about the chequered history of the relation between science and religion, at least one thing is clear: that they do indeed compete for truth about the origin of the universe, the nature of human beings and whether the universe manifests evidence of intelligent design (Grayling, 2014, p.108).

Most scientific historians consider this conflict model untenable. Using various examples, Ahmed Dallal makes this case for Islam, showing how scholars like Al-Biruni, Ibn Taymiyyah and Al-Ghazali all had positive approaches to scientific enterprise (Dallal, 2010, p.116). Importantly, he highlights the writings of al-Iji, who states, ‘All (religious) sciences draw from kalām, whereas it draws from none.’ (Dallal, 2010, p.118). Essentially, the entire Kalam discipline could not start with an assumption of God since it mostly concerned proving His existence. Despite the critique of certain aspects of Kalam, it still represented a staple part of Muslim culture and tradition throughout the centuries. Dallal argues that no single reason dictates scientific decline in the Muslim world; rather, it is attributed to a variety of civilizational factors, including military confrontations with Europe at a time of rapid European colonial expansion (Dallal, 2010, p.152-6). Syed Nomanul Haq notes a range of jurisprudential considerations, including calculating prayer times, as an incentive for Muslim astronomy from the years 800-1300 (Haq, 2009, p.35).

Most scientific historians consider this conflict model untenable. Using various examples, Ahmed Dallal makes this case for Islam showcasing how scholars like Al-Biruni, Ibn Taymiyyah and Al-Ghazali all had positive approaches to scientific enterprise (Dallal, 2010, p.116). Importantly, he highlights the writings of al Iji, who states, ‘All (religious) sciences draw from kalām, whereas it draws from none.’ (Dallal, 2010, p.118). Essentially, the entire Kalam discipline could not start with an assumption of God since it mostly concerned proving His existence. Despite the critique of certain aspects of Kalam, it still represented a staple part of Muslim culture and tradition throughout the centuries. Dallal argues that no single reason dictates scientific decline in the Muslim world, rather, it is attributed to a variety of civilizational factors including military confrontations with Europe at a time of rapid European colonial expansion (Dallal, 2010, p.152-6). Syed Nomanul Haq notes a range of jurisprudential considerations, including calculating prayer times, as an incentive for Muslim astronomy from the years 800-1300 (Haq, 2009, p.35).

Dangane da tarihin kimiyya da addini na Cocin Katolika (ko Kiristanci), ka'idar 'rikici' ita ma ba ta sake karbuwa a matsayin bayani mai cikakken iko ga komai ba. Yayin da yake ambaton shari'ar Galileo, John Hedley Brooke ya bayyana cewa:

Regarding the Catholic church’s (or Christianity’s) scientific and religious history, the ‘conflict theory’ is also no longer acceptable as an all-purpose explanation. Mentioning the case of Galileo, John Hedley Brooke claims:

Haɗuwar labarin Galileo tare da shaidar cewa Furotesta ne suka haifar da ci gaban kimiyya na iya sa mutum ya yi tunanin cewa Cocin Katolika gabaɗaya yana adawa da sabbin ci gaban kimiyya. Wannan tunani ba daidai ba ne ta fuskoki aƙalla uku. Na farko, Cocin ya taka muhimmiyar rawa wajen tallafa wa ilimin kimiyya… Na biyu, ƙungiyar Jesuit da ke cikin Cocin tana da fitattun masana falaki, lissafi da kimiyyar eleken fa, waɗanda kuma suka himmatu wajen koyar da kimiyya a shirye-shiryen ilimin su. Na uku, wasu daga cikin manyan masana kimiyya kuma masu tasiri a ƙarni na sha bakwai Katolikai ne. Galileo, Mersenne, Gassendi da Descartes duk sun taka rawa sosai wajen mayar da yanayi injina (Brooke, 2010, p.12).

The combination of the Galileo story with evidence for a Protestant stimulus to science can easily give the impression that the Catholic Church was generally hostile to scientific innovation. This impression would be false on at least three counts. First, the Church had played a crucial role in the patronage of the sciences… Second, the Jesuit order within the Church contained outstanding astronomers, mathematicians, and physicists who were also committed to teaching the sciences in their educational programs. Third, some of the greatest and most influential scientists of the seventeenth century were Catholics. Galileo, Mersenne, Gassendi, and Descartes all played prominent roles in the mechanization of nature (Brooke, 2010, p.12).

Tasirin Furotesta (da Furotestanci a musamman Puritanci) ya kasance ɗaya daga cikin abubuwan da aka yi nazarin zamantakewarsu sosai. Wani bincike da Robert Merton ya yi ya dogara sosai kan bayanai daga Dictionary of National Biography, kuma ya yi nazari kan bayanai daga tarihin rayuwar mashahuran mutane 29,120 na karni na sha bakwai (da sauran muhimman bayanai), inda ya kammala da cewa Puritanci (wanda, a ganin Merton, ya ƙarfafa wata irin falsafar amfanin addini) ya ba da ƙwarin gwiwa ga binciken kimiyya.

The impact of Protestantism (and Puritanism in particular) has been one of significant sociological study. One study by Robert Merton was highly dependent on data from the Dictionary of National Biography, and examined information from 29,120 biographies of notable figures in the seventeenth century (among other important data sets) concluding that Puritanism (which, to Merton, encouraged a kind of theological utilitarianism) provided an impetus for scientific discovery.

Saboda haka, Merton ya bayyana cewa:

Accordingly, Merton states:

A cikin wannan tsari kai tsaye, addini ya amince da ilimin kimiyya, wanda hakan ya ɗaga darajar zamantakewar waɗanda suka yi binciken kimiyya, tare da ƙaruwa da yaɗuwar sha'awa a irin waɗannan bincike (Merton, 2002, p.431).

In this direct fashion, religion sanctioned science raising the social estimation of those who pursued scientific investigation, with the associated intensification and spread of interest in such pursuits (Merton, 2002, p.431).

Merton ya bambanta halin Furotesta da na Katolika ta hanyar da'awar cewa:

Merton distinguishes the Protestant attitude from the Catholic one by claiming:

Wannan kwatancin tsakanin makarantun Puritan na Ingila da ci gaban ilimi na Furotesta a Turai ya dace sosai. Makarantun Furotesta na Faransa sun ba da kulawa mai yawa ga ilimin kimiyya da darussan masu amfani fiye da makarantun Katolika (Merton, 2002, shafi 478-9).

This comparison of the Puritan academies in England and Protestant educational developments on the Continent is well warranted. The Protestant academies in France devoted much more attention to scientific and utilitarian subjects than did the Catholic institutions (Merton, 2002, p.478-9).

Merton ya tattauna sauran abubuwan da suka taimaka wajen karuwar sha'awa ga kimiyya, ciki har da abubuwan soji; musamman sabuwar sha'awa game da makamai masu linzami (Merton, 2002, p.543).

Merton discusses other contributory factors to the increased interest in science, including military factors; especially new interest in ballistic weaponry (Merton, 2002, p.543).

Bunda ya biyo baya, mutum yana fahimtar kamancecewar da ke tsakanin ra'ayin Merton da ka'idar Max Weber a cikin littafin The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (2013). A zahiri, yawancin hujjojin da ake amfani da su wajen adawa da ka'idar Weber na iya kasancewa ana amfani da su ga ta Merton, waɗanda za su haɗa da rashin iya bayanin al'ummomi wasu, musamman Japan, waɗanda suka sami duka jari-hujja da ci gaban fasaha ba tare da Furotesta a matsayin abin motsa su ba. Mutum na iya bayar da wani bayani madadin Furotesta ta hanyar amfanin duniya wanda ba na addini ba (watakila tsarin Locke ko Hobbes), kamar yadda Merton ya yi tunani a kai (Merton, 2002, p.589). Gabaɗaya, yana da wuya a nuna Furotesta ko Puritanism a matsayin babban abin da ya haddasa ci gaban kimiyya, domin zai yi wuya a zarge shi (ko Katolika) da hana kimiyya gaba ɗaya. Sabbin masu kafirci sukan kawo Darwin a matsayin juyin-juya-hali. Sai dai babu wata shaida da ke nuna cewa Darwin ya bar Kiristanci saboda ka'idar zaɓin halitta. A wannan batu, James Moore ya yi iƙirarin cewa:

Consequently, one realises the similarity between the Merton thesis and Max Weber’s theory in the Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism (2013). In reality, many of the arguments used against Weber’s thesis may also be used against Merton’s which may include either Merton or Weber’s inability to account for other nations (most notably Japan) which underwent both capitalism and technological advancement without Protestantism as a catalyst. One may provide an alternative explanation to Protestantism through non-religious utilitarianism (perhaps a Lockian or Hobbesian formulation), as was contemplated by Merton (Merton, 2002, p.589). Overall, it is difficult to pin-point Protestantism or Puritanism as a decisive factor in scientific progress inasmuch as it would be difficult to blame it (or Catholicism) for generally inhibiting science. New Atheists often invoke Darwin as the turning point. There is no evidence, however, that Darwin apostatised from Christianity because of his theory of natural selection. On this point, James Moore claims:

Shaidarsa da kansa ba kasafai ake saurarar ta ba: "Ban daina Kiristanci ba sai da na kai shekaru arba'in." Darwin ya cika shekaru arba'in a shekarar 1849, tun bayan da ya samar da ka'idarsa ta juyin halitta ta zaɓin halitta (Moore, 2010, shafi na 143), kuma Brooke ya yarda da cewa:

His own testimony is seldom heeded: “I never gave up Christianity until I was forty years of age.” Darwin turned forty in 1849, long after developing his theory of evolution by natural selection (Moore, 2010, p.143) and Brooke agrees that:

Manyan dalilan da Darwin ya bayar na rashin imaninsa ba su samo asali daga matsayin da ya ba dalilai na halitta wajen bayanin asalin nau'ikan halittu ba. Kamar sauran masana tunanin zamanin Victoria, Darwin ya yi tsayayyiyar adawa da wa'azin Kiristanci na bishara game da aljanna da jahannama (Brooke, 2010, shafi na 228).

The main reasons Darwin gave for his unbelief derived not from the role he gave natural causes in explaining the origin of species. Like other Victorian thinkers, Darwin reacted strongly against evangelical Christian preaching on heaven and hell (Brooke, 2010, p.228).

Asalin Origin of Species an buga shi a shekarar 1859, a zamanin Daular Usmaniyya bayan Tanzimat, lokacin da yawancin ƙasashen Musulmi suke ƙarƙashin mulkin mallaka. Saboda haka, yana da wuya a tantance martanin ƙasashen Musulmi ga Darwinism. Duk da haka, a bayyane yake cewa rikicin tafsiri ya taso (kuma yana ci gaba da tasowa)

Origin of Species was published in 1859 during the post-Tanzimaat Ottoman period when most of the Muslim world was colonised. Accordingly, it is difficult to assess a Muslim state response to Darwinism. Nevertheless, it is clear that exegetical conflict did (and continues to)

ya kamata a yi la'akari da shi aƙalla a fannin juyin halittar ɗan adam, kamar yadda yake a duniyar Kiristanci. Saboda haka, tsarin rikici tsakanin dukkan ‘kimiyya’ da dukkan ‘addini’ (ana la'akari da addinai biyu kawai da aka ambata) ba shi da tushe a tarihi.

feature at least on the aspect of human evolution, similar to the Christian world. Therefore, models of conflict between all of ‘science’ and all of ‘religion’ (considering only two religions are mentioned) are simply ahistorical.