Religion by nature is a subjective social construct that has existed since ancient times. Intangible elements of religion that are subjective to a believer can’t be studied by science as they can’t be seen. Emotions, socio-cultural religious beliefs, practices, attitudes and motivations can’t be observed through scientific method since they are subjective and therefore can’t be studied with the lens of a scientific purpose.

Most notable is the argument that religious and non-religious people have between creation and evolution. There is a scientific evidentiary basis behind evolution because of fossilization and carbon dating, structural sedimentary and geographical evidence and the scientific study of mutations of DNA. Due to this brevity of scientific evidence, there is largely a consensus in society about the existence of evolution. Unlike evolution, creation is based on subjective experiences, intangible elements and interpretation of religious texts which has allowed for significant debate about the existence of creation and whether or it not it is the foundation of the universe.

Researchers have tried to conclude why people believe in religion. This has led to subjective conclusions that are influenced by the preconceived ideas and conceptions of the researchers involved and how they choose to sample people. There can be no concrete conclusions made about why people believe in religion because it is subjective and there is no limit on the number of conclusions that can be surmised. Therefore, attempting to understand the motivations, practices, beliefs and emotions behind religion through the study of psychology is significant as it can influence practical decision making such as policy ideation and implementation. One example is vaccinations against Covid-19 and the persistence of some religious communities not to get them for various reasons associated with their practices. Regions such as the west coast have lower vaccination rates when compared to the rest of the country because of religious communities like Gloriavale being apprehensive towards receiving the vaccine.

Some researchers as posited in an article directly correlate the impact of religious beliefs towards an increase in emotional well-being. The conclusions are similar to those made in Corbett’s reading of Jungian psychology. Carl Jung believed in the significance of the correlation between spirituality, religion and the undeniable connection to mental health. Corbett references a thesis of Hill and Pargament a study which Corbett shows religious and spiritual beliefs in various communities has made a positive impact on mental, physical and emotional health and wellbeing. Jung’s theories on the unconscious brain and religion can be a likened to the positive benefits of activities like meditation, relaxation and yoga on an individual’s physical and mental wellbeing, activities which are founded on the principles of religion.

This could well be the case as many people turn to religion when facing significant hardship and a belief in faith. The persistence of hope of one’s situation getting better could increase an individual’s emotional wellbeing. We could also look at this phenomenon in relation to the acceptance of death because of a positive outlook on the afterlife. Other ideas posited in Paloutzian’s reading illustrates the different ways of understanding the phenomenon and its study because of subjectivity.

Society has evolved and developed a better understanding of the human brain. Consequently, more theories about the relationship between the brain and religion have been suggested with varied reception by scientific and religious communities. Paloutzian references ideas such as digital technology and its understanding of religious experiences, social conditioning, self-actualization and its relationship to religion, and socio-cultural impact on individual and collective behaviour historically and contemporarily. Additionally, how this intersects across a global landscape of interpretations, knowledge and understanding.

Researchers and scholars again have their own subjective interpretation about studying religion and how this relates to science. There is no clear conclusion to studying religion because of the conflicting opinions on the subject. Due to the subjectivity and science of the human brain, understanding trauma and coping mechanisms and underlying psychological understanding could link to the scientific study of religion. Simultaneously, the subjectivity of an individual’s experiences and an inability to examine Religion through the scientific method for people’s experiences, socio-cultural religious beliefs, practices, motivations and emotions illustrates the limitations of religion as a scientific study.

In order to attain peace, we must study religion and the intersection or lack thereof with science. Understanding religious beliefs, customs and practices and how they differ from our interpretations of science help to formulate foreign and global policy. An understanding of both conflicts from past to present, to predicting future areas of tension help peacekeeping operations like the United Nations functioning.