This presentation and discussion explore some of the themes addressed in the paper “Science and Religion in Dynamic Interplay," which begins by considering legitimate concerns many thinkers have with religion. It then describes how it may be fruitful to think about both science and religion as viable sources of knowledge in their own right. The balance of the paper focuses on three ways in which science and religion can be understood to complement each other—how they supplement each other, correspond to each other, and cultivate each other—and the implications for the generation of knowledge.
Todd Smith holds a Ph.D. from the University of Toronto where he focused on the development of a consultative epistemology as it pertains to health and illness. He has since published articles on epistemology, the harmony of science and religion, freedom, and historical consciousness. He was recently the coordinator of the Research Department at the Bahá’í World Centre in Haifa, Israel, and now serves on the Executive Committee of the Association for Bahá’í Studies in North America.
Tara Raam is a post-doctoral fellow in Neurobiology at UCLA. Her research uses simultaneous recordings of brain activity in groups of mice in combination with machine learning approaches to generate models of individual and collective behavior. She is interested in discourses on consciousness, evolution, human nature, and harmony of science and religion.
Whitney White Kazemipour
Whitney White Kazemipour is interested in the resonance and interplay between, on the one hand, Bahá’u’lláh’s Revelation and the guidance from the Universal House of Justice, and, on the other, insights from psychocultural anthropology and cultural history. She will be co-teaching Wilmette Institute’s “In Pursuit of Harmony Between Science and Religion” beginning this August. She has a PhD in Anthropology (UCLA) and an A.B. in Cultural History (Princeton).
No biography available.
The views expressed in this recording are those of the presenters and do not necessarily represent the views of the Association for Bahá’í Studies, nor the authoritative explications of Bahá’í writings.