Kwa kuzingatia mambo haya yote, ni vigumu kuthibitisha kwamba NOMA (non-overlapping magisteria, yaani mamlaka zisizoingiliana) inaweza kutumika kwa ujumla, kama ilivyo vigumu pia kuhalalisha dhana ya New Atheism kuhusu mgogoro. Katika mambo haya, ni muhimu sana kwamba viongozi wa dini ya Kikristo na Kiislamu wafahamu hoja za New Atheism, ili waweze kuzijibu kupitia utafiti wa taaluma mbalimbali unaojumuisha, lakini usiishie tu kwenye, kuelewa historia ya sayansi. Kwa hiyo, inaweza kuwa na manufaa kuanza kwa kupima baadhi ya madai makuu ya New Atheists. Katika upotoshaji mkubwa wa historia, Grayling anaandika:

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:

Bila kujali mtu anaweza kufikiria nini kuhusu historia yenye misukosuko ya uhusiano kati ya sayansi na dini, jambo moja angalau liko wazi: kwamba hizi mbili kweli hushindana kutafuta ukweli kuhusu asili ya ulimwengu, asili ya binadamu, na kama ulimwengu unaonyesha ushahidi wa usanifu wa kimaksudi wenye akili (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 the 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).

Kuhusu historia ya kisayansi na kidini ya kanisa Katoliki (au Ukristo), nadharia ya "mgongano" pia haikubaliki tena kama maelezo ya jumla yanayoweza kutumika kwa kila jambo. Akitaja kisa cha Galileo, John Hedley Brooke anadai:

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:

Mchanganyiko wa hadithi ya Galileo na ushahidi wa kwamba Matengenezo ya Kiprotestanti yalichochea sayansi unaweza kwa urahisi kutoa taswira kwamba Kanisa Katoliki kwa ujumla lilipinga uvumbuzi wa kisayansi. Taswira hii ingekuwa si ya kweli kwa angalau sababu tatu. Kwanza, Kanisa lilicheza nafasi muhimu sana katika kuyadhamini sayansi… Pili, shirika la Wajesuit ndani ya Kanisa lilikuwa na wanaastronomia, wanahisabati na wanafizikia mashuhuri, ambao pia walijitolea kufundisha sayansi katika mipango yao ya elimu. Tatu, baadhi ya wanasayansi wakubwa na wenye ushawishi mkubwa zaidi wa karne ya kumi na saba walikuwa Wakatoliki. Galileo, Mersenne, Gassendi na Descartes walichukua nafasi maarufu katika kuifanya maumbile kuwa ya kimitambo (Brooke, 2010, uk. 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).

Athari ya Uprotestanti (na hasa Upuritani) imekuwa mada ya utafiti mkubwa wa kijamii. Utafiti mmoja wa Robert Merton ulitegemea sana data kutoka Dictionary of National Biography, na ulichunguza taarifa kutoka kwa wasifu 29,120 wa watu mashuhuri wa karne ya kumi na saba (pamoja na seti nyingine muhimu za data), na kuhitimisha kwamba Upuritani (ambao, kwa Merton, ulihimiza aina fulani ya utumiaji wa kitheolojia) ulitoa msukumo kwa ugunduzi wa kisayansi.

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.

Kwa hiyo, Merton anasema:

Accordingly, Merton states:

Kwa namna hii ya moja kwa moja, dini iliyoidhinisha sayansi iliinua hadhi ya kijamii ya wale waliofuatilia uchunguzi wa kisayansi, pamoja na ukuaji na kuenea kwa shauku katika shughuli hizo (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 anatomia msimamo wa Waprotestanti kutoka wa Wakatoliki kwa kudai kwamba:

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

Ulinganisho huu wa shule za Wapuritani nchini Uingereza na maendeleo ya elimu ya Kiprotestanti barani Ulaya una msingi mzuri. Shule za Kiprotestanti nchini Ufaransa zilitoa umakini mkubwa zaidi kwa masomo ya kisayansi na ya kimatumizi kuliko taasisi za Kikatoliki (Merton, 2002, uk. 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 anajadili mambo mengine yaliyochangia kuongezeka kwa hamu ya sayansi, ikiwemo mambo ya kijeshi; hasa hamu mpya ya silaha za kurusha risasi (ballistic weaponry) (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).

Bunaendelea, mtu anaona ulinganifu kati ya nadharia ya Merton na nadharia ya Max Weber katika kitabu *The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism* (2013). Kwa kweli, hoja nyingi zinazotumiwa dhidi ya nadharia ya Weber zinaweza pia kutumiwa dhidi ya nadharia ya Merton. Hizi zinaweza kujumuisha kushindwa kwa Merton au Weber kueleza mataifa mengine, hasa Japani, ambayo yalipitia ukuaji wa ubepari na maendeleo ya kiteknolojia bila Uprotestanti kuwa kichocheo. Mtu anaweza kutoa maelezo mbadala kwa Uprotestanti kupitia utilitarianism isiyo ya kidini (labda mfumo wa Locke au Hobbes), kama alivyowazia Merton (Merton, 2002, uk. 589). Kwa ujumla, ni vigumu kubainisha Uprotestanti au Upuritani kama sababu ya maamuzi katika maendeleo ya sayansi, kwa kuwa itakuwa vigumu pia kuulaumu (au Ukatoliki) kwa kuzuia sayansi kwa ujumla. Wanaoitwa New Atheists mara nyingi hutaja Darwin kama kigeuzi cha mwelekeo. Hata hivyo, hakuna ushahidi kwamba Darwin aliacha Ukristo kwa sababu ya nadharia yake ya uteuzi asilia. Kuhusu hoja hii, James Moore anadai:

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:

Ushahidi wake mwenyewe mara chache huzingatiwa: "Sikuwahi kuacha Ukristo hadi nilipofikia umri wa miaka arobaini." Darwin alitimiza miaka arobaini mwaka 1849, muda mrefu baada ya kuunda nadharia yake ya mageuzi kwa uteuzi asilia (Moore, 2010, uk. 143), na Brooke anakubaliana kwamba:

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:

Sababu kuu zilizotolewa na Darwin kwa kutoamini kwake hazikutokana na nafasi aliyoipa sababu za kimaumbile katika kueleza asili ya spishi. Kama wanafikra wengine wa enzi ya Victoria, Darwin alipinga vikali mahubiri ya Kikristo ya kiinjilisti kuhusu mbingu na jehanamu (Brooke, 2010, uk. 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).

*Origin of Species* kilichapishwa mwaka 1859 katika kipindi cha baada ya Tanzimat cha Dola ya Ottoman, wakati sehemu kubwa ya ulimwengu wa Kiislamu ilikuwa chini ya ukoloni. Kwa sababu hiyo, ni vigumu kutathmini mwitikio wa dola za Kiislamu kwa Darwinism. Hata hivyo, ni wazi kwamba mgogoro wa kitafsiri (exegetical) ulijitokeza, na unaendelea kujitokeza hadi leo.

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)

Kwa hiyo, vielelezo vya mgongano kati ya "sayansi" yote na "dini" yote (ikizingatiwa dini mbili tu zinazotajwa) ni vya kihistoria visivyo sahihi.

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.