Science and Religion as an Instrumental Reality on Legal Policy

Abstract

In the history of human thought, the relationship between science and religion has often been marked by tension and contradiction. Science, with its empirical and rational approach, seeks to understand the universe through methods of observation, experimentation, and logical deduction. In contrast, religion is based on revelation and dogma accepted by the people as absolute truths that regulate the moral, social, and spiritual aspects of life. This study aims to discuss the impact of differences in scientific and religious views on reality on legal policies
in plural societies; What are the criteria for the validity of knowledge in the formulation of legal policies in plural societies; and How are legal considerations for the pragmatic goals of science and the moral values of religion in public ethics issues. This study was conducted using the Normative Juridical method. The research results found that the conflict between the empirical scientific approach and the spiritual-based religious values not only creates a dilemma at the theoretical level, but also has an impact on public policy and regulations that regulate social life in practice. This tension raises philosophical questions about how law can act as an effective bridge, combining objective scientific evidence with moral values held by society. In the context of law, it is important to understand that science and religion do not have to be two poles that exclude each other. Law in a pluralistic society should adopt a balanced and inclusive approach by paying attention to the principles of justice and public welfare. The overlapping consensus approach, as proposed by John Rawls, offers a framework that can be the basis for formulating policies that can accommodate the interests of various groups with different beliefs. In practice, this means that law can be pragmatic to meet the demands of science, while still maintaining an ethical foundation that is in accordance with religious norms. The suggestion in this study is that there should be criticism of this approach, perhaps highlighting the technical challenges in formulating policies that can satisfy both opposing views so that the application of the principle of balance that recognizes the validity of science and respects religious beliefs provides an opportunity for the law to not only be a firm rule, but also a reflection of social justice. Thus, a plural legal system must be able to accommodate this dynamic, ensuring that the resulting policy is not only a pragmatic response to technological advances, but also pays attention to the moral and ethical values that underlie social harmony in making a legal policy.