Controllability Principle in Responsibility Accounting

Controllability Principle in Responsibility Accounting One underlying concept of the traditional management control system is the responsibility accounting. It is viewed as an important feature because it permits the ease of decentralization in M-form organizations. It distributes accountability and provides accounting reports on these distributed accountabilities. It provides a way for large unmanageable organizations to be managed such that all subsystems have similar goals. It can be defined as a system where managers are held responsible for activities under their leadership. Built on responsibility accounting is the principle of controllability. This principle has been viewed as the cornerstone of responsibility accounting (S. Modell and A. Lee, 2001). The principle states that managers should only be evaluated on elements that are within their control. Research literatures on responsibility accounting point to the fact that responsibility accounting and the controllability principle cannot be made independent of one another. The re lationship becomes obvious when both are looked at together; responsibility accounting holds the manager responsible for a particular division but the controllability principle ensures that the managers are held responsible only for factors that they can control. For this reason, Ferrara (1964) called responsibility accounting a communication system with the sole purpose of helping the organization achieve its goals. The controllability principle, therefore, serves to make this communication channel clearer and understandable. The role played by the controllability principle makes it an appealing notion. However, much research articles have argued for the observance of controllability principle as well as against its observance in responsibility accounting. This paper seeks to evaluate the arguments for and against the observance of the principle of controllability. Arguments For and Against the Observance of Controllability Principle Recent research concludes that there are two types of uncontrollable factors within the borders of controllability; internal uncontrollable and external uncontrollable factors. Studies also show that when it comes to controllability, managers consider responsibility accounting fair when the effects of internal uncontrollable factors on their performance is negated in appraisal. The concept of fairness was given in McNally G. (1980) as one of the rationales for observing the principle of controllability. He stated this using the expectancy theory of motivation. The notion of fairness makes the observance of controllability desirable when performance evaluations are carried out on the managers. The controllability principle makes the appraisal a fair one. This is as a result of the appraisal done in consideration of the controllable factors and uncontrollable factors. The result of the appraisal would be a satisfied and possibly motivated manager. Choudhury N. (1986) goes further to sa y that this conforms to the commonly held principle of justice. The equity theory of motivation also helps to explain it further the theory says a fair days work for a fair days pay. In the case of the manager and controllability, this would be a fair assessment for a fair periods work. Achieving organizational goals are very important for any firm and the means of doing that is through the managers of the decentralized firms but if the managers perception of the performance appraisal is unfair, he is demotivated and unsatisfied. He also loses focus and possibly direction. Going by McGregors Y theory of motivation, this could damage the managers perception of his work. He wants to work and put in his best but if his best is judged against things out of his control, this could lead him to learned helplessness or to leave the firm (Nandan C, 1986). For such an organization whose appraisal system is deemed to be unfair, they would have a high turnover rate. The implications of this are far reaching as harmful managerial behaviour might crop up. With fairness in place, observing the principle of controllability helps managers to pay attention to uncontrollable factors. The responsibility accounting holds them accountable for what goes on in their divisions; controllability principle makes the uncontrollable factors obvious. Managers will direct corrective efforts to these uncontrollable factors (McNally G., 1980). This in turn would help to influence the managers behaviour such that it aligns with organizational goals. The knowledge that his appraisal is a fair one would motivate him to try to exert some influence over these uncontrollable factors. If the influence pays off, then he is one step closer to achieving organizational goals. This also induces him/her to pay more attention to factors previously perceived as uncontrollable but now influenceable because of the effort he has applied (F. Giraud, P. Langevin and C. Mendoza, 2008). In the agency theory framework of management control where all information is used to appr aise the managers performance in line with the controllability principle, the appraisal report highlights the controllable and uncontrollable factors. Senior management can attach rewards to these seemingly uncontrollable factors to ensure that managers do their best to attain them without neglecting other duties necessary for the organizational goal attainment. S. Modell and A. Lee (2001) refer to the influence over seemingly uncontrollable factors when they noted that reliance on controllability principle helps to enhance managerial control of powerful institutional actors such as managers. The empirical study carried out by Frow N, Marginson D, and Odgen S. (2005) at Astoria PLC also points out the fact that factors that cannot be controlled can be influenced with some effort; they found out that the firm uses the AIP (Astoria Improvement Process) to reinforce influenceablity. They noted that the AIP helps the manager retain some form of control where they have only partial contr ollability but the AIP also imposes expectation on the managers. This would ensure that the managers make extra effort to influence these factors to meet the expectation laid up on them. Controllability principle helps to neutralize the effects of uncontrollable factors on a managers performance, thus giving a true picture of the managers efforts. This is another appealing notion of the controllability principle. It has been argued that the organization is a social system that grows in complexity like the biological systems. This complexity brings with it constant changes and in the organizational context, this would mean unforeseen changes that can have positive or negative effects on the efforts of the manager. One of such complexity is the competitive and economic elements. Both of these can affect the managers effort in a positive or negative way. An appropriate example is the financial crisis of 2007-2010 which has caused a downturn in stock prices. This in turn affects the profit and investment levels but the controllability principle neutralizes the effects of the financial crisis on the managers performance. Giraud et al (2008) noted that neutralization of un controllable factors can take two forms; ex-ante neutralization and ex-post neutralization, both of which have the same the same result, neutralizing the effects of uncontrollable factors on the performance of the managers. The Controllability principle provides a reliable assessment of the managers performance. When all uncontrollable factors have been neutralized, the assessment will be based on the efforts of the manager in improving the division under his control. Choudhury (1986) notes this when he says that the results of the division under the mangers control is a combination of the managers efforts and the uncontrollable factors. Separating managers effort from uncontrollable factors provides a better basis for assessment. In the principal agent framework, this would be a very necessary basis for rewards, the principal uses everything in his disposal to appraise the manager but when controllability principle removes the uncontrollable factors, the managers efforts are clearly seen. The rewards can then be based on the managers efforts at controlling the factors that he could to achieve organizational objectives. Ferrara (1964) argues that the controllability principle in responsibility accounting helps the organization to grow in that it helps to locate the errors and mistakes of the organizational members. He argues that errors and mistakes are the stuff of which progress is made . He also argues that controllability is a means of locating those activities and people in the organization in need of help so that assistance can be rendered and scarce resources of the organization would be more utilized. This would mean that controllability principle works in line with the organizational goals and where a positive attitude about it is inculcated in managers, the organization should move at the targeted pace. The responsibility accounting reports will make clear the controllable factors and the uncontrollable factors but amidst the controllable factors, a well prepared report will reveal where there might be problems. These problems can be considered and worked on or used as a base for future st rategic plans. When all errors and mistakes are corrected, they make room for improvement. In spite of these appealing advantages for controllability principle, there have been arguments against its observance in the responsibility accounting. Choudhury (1986) argues that controllability principle is not sacrosanct. Considering the size of big firms, a lot of factors hinder the practicality of the controllability principle. The interdependencies of the divisions within these firms create an unclear line with respect to divisional boundaries and places difficulty on the responsibility accounting process. One such factor is the task complexity of some divisions. If a particular manager works with another divisional manager to accomplish a difficult task, it becomes difficult to appraise the managers efforts because supposedly, the manager with the task had control over the particular task but performance appraisal with controllability principle makes this difficult. The manager had the task under his control but the other manager that helped had no control over the task but had ideas and participated in accomplishing the task. In this aspect Amey (1979) compares organizations to biological systems that grow in complexity. The complex growth makes controllability impossible. Observing the controllability principle in complex organizations is limiting on the innovativeness and the creativity of managers in the organizations. When managers are aware that they are being assessed on controllable factors, they would not be willing to take on risky ventures that have potential benefits for the organization. In their examination of the limitations of controllability principle, Antle and Demski (1988) conclude that the limitations of controllability on organizational growth can be modified through the information content notion. The limitation of the controllability principle is a hindrance on the positive results of team work. M-form organizations require team work to succeed, however, the observance of the controllability principle in the principal-agent framework breeds competition and this affect team work negatively thus a sales manager might have a good idea on how to achieve the tasks of the marketing manager but because he does not want the marketing man ager to do better that him in their performance appraisal, he would not assist or offer advice. Team work is therefore placed at the bottom of the list of useful organizational ethics. On the contrary where both managers would work together without neglecting their divisional duties, they could achieve desired results and if possible, meet their separate targets. The study carried out by Frow et al (2006) supports this fact; their findings revolve around accountability without controllability and the results also shows that the Astoria Plc. encouraged more co-operations because of organizational promotion of greater interdependencies. Another aspect where the observance of controllability principle is limiting is the area of performance evaluation. It limits the use of market measures in evaluating the managers performance. The use of market measures is one of the ways of evaluating senior management employees and the limiting effect of the controllability principle weakens the effe ctiveness of these measures (Merchant, 2006). The limitations of the controllability principle lead to rigidity in organizations. The controllability principle does not allow room for organizational flexibility. It limits the organization to growth based on only controllable factors. Modern day organizations are very dynamic and this constant change is not compatible with the concept of controllability. If controllability principle is been observed in an organization, the organization would not allow change such that it is flexible and easily adaptable to changes in its environment. Amey (1979) argued that businesses needed to maintain flexibility in internal arrangements such that adjustment would not be impeded and its links with its environment would grow stronger. Observing controllability principle in responsibility accounting involves some elements of subjectivity. This occurs when the basis for establishing controllable and uncontrollable factor are unclear. The performance evaluation team will have to set a criterion to use when carrying out an appraisal; this criterion would be based on what they think and probably not what they are aware of. In doing this, they become subjective in the appraisal. This would be perceived by the manager as unfair appraisal. He would view himself as being unfairly treated without consideration of factors contingent upon his performance. As a result of this perception of the performance appraisal, the manager could behave in a dysfunctional way. Such actions would be detrimental to the organizational goals. A manager who perceives an unfair system would also be demotivated. The findings of the research done by Giraud et al (2008) concluded that managers do not want uncontrollable external factors neutralized because of the level of subjectivity involved in it. Similarly, drawing from the study carried out by Modell and Lee (2001) institutional factors affect the controllability principle, in turn these factors affect the efficiency of the responsibility accounting system. The controllability principle is also expensive to maintain in an organization. I would argue that the process involved in ensuring the observance of responsibility principle is not cost efficient. The process would require constant research into the market forces so as to distinguish controllable factors from uncontrollable factors; where it is not possible to make such a distinction, the organization would have to incur more costs to ensure that the performance appraisal system is perceived as fair by its managers. The energies and costs that would be consumed by such a process would be effectively used in another part of the organization where it would be beneficial. Giraud et al (2008) also argues on the difficulty of evaluating uncontrollable factors, they specifically note the difficulty as regards the impact of economic recession. Thus, I would also argue that payment for the services of qualified experts on the distinction between controllable and uncontrollable factors for p erformance evaluation is an unnecessary cost to the organization. Research has also shown that observing the controllability principle leads to dysfunctional behaviour of managers. Hirst (1983) noted that reliance on performance measures that capture uncontrollable factors promote dysfunctional behaviour. This as a result of the managers perception of the performance evaluation system; he wants to avoid the effects of uncontrollable factors and he does that by engaging in activities that do not promote organizational objectives. Giraud et al (2008) mention such activities to include data manipulation, creating slack and developing an excuse culture. He narrows his focus to just the factors that he knows he would be appraised by and where he fails, his self-efficacy is reduced. Observing controllability principle in responsibility accounting can have consequences for organizational goals. It can lead to short termism on the part of manager. In narrowing their focus, managers focus on the components of the performance evaluation system and not on the organizational goals. This would lead to the neglecting of organizational long term goals. Thus, a manager with a long term goal of improved return on investment but with a sales division short term goal of number of user complaints per month and percentage variation from budgets will focus only on reducing the percentage variation from budgets thereby maligning the chances of improving the ROI. This might mean inferior sales strategies that would result in a drop in sales figures which have negative effects on the ROI. Conclusion Theoretically, observing the controllability principle in responsibility accounting has been perceived to have its advantages and disadvantages to the organization. The definition of the controllability principle indicates that there is a clear distinction between controllable and uncontrollable factors. This distinction supposedly makes it easy to observe in responsibility accounting. However, empirical studies reveal that organizations do not fully observe the controllability principle. Findings indicate that there is some sort of continuum that has controllable factors on one end and uncontrollable factors on the other end with varying degrees of control in between. Studies also show that some managers do not see themselves on either end of the continuum but somewhere in the middle. This means that strict observance of the controllability principle is impractical. Choudhury (1986) argues that the responsibility accounting concept should not be hindered by controllability and that it should be interpreted independently of controllability. Moreover, controllability should be defined contingent upon the contexts of the organization. McNally (1980) also argues that controllability can be applied in a modified version. Recent literature also indicates that organizations tend to hold managers for factors that they can influence rather than factors that they can control. This lies somewhere between controllable factors and uncontrollable factors on the controllability continuum. Giraud et al (2008) refer to this as the influencable factors. In addition, the interdependencies of organizations blur the lines separating controllability and other sub-systems in the responsibility accounting system (Hirst, 1983) as well as the uncertainties of the organizational environment. Consequently, I would argue that strict observance of the controllability principle is unrealistic. The modification and the re-definition of the controllability principle is a gradual shift away from the premise of the controllability principle. The difference between controllable and uncontrollable factors is lacking in clarity as regards modern organizations. It also does not align well with the structure of modern day organizations. Similarly, factors that can be influenced today might not be influenced the next day or next operating period because of the unpredictability of the environments of the organizations. Besides, can the ability to influence an event be measured and to what extent can it be measured?

The Importance of Poetry

Laura E. Smith Ms. Rachel MacNally English Honours 11th January 11th, 2012 The Importance of Poetry To each person, poetry has a varied significance and importance in their life. Some people may value poetry highly while others may consider it as something of lesser importance. The importance of poetry in today’s literary society is substantially important because it has an ability to express the thoughts and emotions of a writer through flowing words. Throughout history, poetry has been important because it gives us a historical representation of what previous generations found beautiful, important, or profound.It can show us words and concepts from the past. Poetry can even depict historical events. Poets in the past may have written a poem after a big event had occurred and by reading their poems, we can see how the event affected everyday people. As Ralph Waldo Emerson once said â€Å"Poetry, above any other art form, comes closest to fulfulling the goal of art. Art is th e representation of the unrepresentable. Through language, space, and metaphor poetry is able to skirt the edges of capturing an ever changing world's beauty and ugliness better than any other art form. Many people may ask themselves, is poetry closest to fulfilling the goal of art? The reason is because anyone can write it without being judged because there is a variety, and so many ways to write poetry. From free verse to haikus, structured poems to couplets, the sky is the limit. Anyone can write poetry because it is your ideas and emotions that you are letting flow onto a piece of paper. The variety of poems allows people to be able to fashion their own combinations for writing poetry and ultimately creating their own unique style. Its shortness can be a vehicle to convey an idea that longer pieces may not fully capture.Poetry captures the urgency of a moment in the life of the writer. The art of poetry has always surrounded us, ever since we were little children. We began by li stening to our parents sing us Nursery Rhymes which at the end of the day are fun poems that we all remember. Communication is essential for life to continue. So the reading and writing of poetry is very involved with the interplay and dialogue between humans. Without poetry, life would be a very long lecture on morality. It is a way for young writers to let off steam and dream without being judged.It is also a way for an adult writer to express their madness, regrets, desires, aspirations and belief system. Poetry is the deep and powerful expression of the human condition; it encompasses all emotion, all modes of living; it can be mourning or celebration, song or scream, revelation or denial, acceptance or resistance,  and sometimes all of these at once. Poetry puts your observations, opinions, and even train of thought out in the open. Once people see how you think, they might have a feeling of why you say what you say, do what you do, or react like you do.This can prevent misun derstandings. Poetry can make it easier to step into the shoes of someone else. Due to this, poets are some of the first voices to protest social and political injustices; they are some of the first to mourn losses, cultural and personal; and they are some of the first to rejoice in the wonders of the living in and for the world. Unlike most forms of literature, poetry conveys more emotion than logical progression. It's the origin of songs, and is an indispensable way to express one's self since it is unbound by rules on grammatical clarity and precision.Poetry is perhaps one of the most versatile of literary forms since it can convey great emotion, lyrical aesthetic, and a story all at the same time. It is some sort of a midpoint between songs and stories. And yet for all its magic, poetry is found in our daily speech. It uses words that are known to all of us, but in a sequence and order that surprises us out of our normal speech rhythms and linear thought processes. Its effect is to illuminate our lives and breathe new life, new seeing, new tasting into the world we thought we knew.Poetry allows children and adults alike to explore the English language. Mixing words in sentences to find the right fit to create a sense of rhythm and flow. Poetry is real. Real people have written it to express real emotion that is normally hidden. Poets write to show that people have felt certain things before which someone else may be experiencing at another time. A poem allows you to see beyond the surface. Sometimes this is done through metaphors or other abstract ways which cause you to really think. Beauty is expressed, and art is emphasized through poetry.Finding and using words to fit exactly how you want them to takes time and thought. When people read poetry, they have a chance to really see the world with some of the bells and whistles stripped away; it lets them concentrate on the details which remain. Poems often describe life and illuminate aspects of it using fl ashes of imagery. Finally, poetry is a kind of multi-dimensional language. It is directed at the whole person, not just at his understanding. It must involve the reader's senses, intelligence, emotions and imagination.Poetry achieves its extra dimensions per word by employing devices including metaphor, allusion, sound, repetition, rhythm, irony, symbol, connotation and imagery. Using these resources and the materials of life, poetry, in its highest form, comes alive on the page. Poetry is important because it tries to render things that aren't easy to express in words. It does this by making use of attributes of language which aren’t commonly seen to instill deep thought and contemplation. In a sense, poetry uses words as doors to many possibilities. It carries our imaginations or stirs new dreams. Mainly, it extends the power of words to communicate.

August, Osage County Essay

The theater darkens, crowd’s light chatter subsides, and stage lights focus our attention on a magnificent structure. It’s a traditional farmhouse, with all your typical nooks and crannies, so big it juts out into the audience as if forcing us into this structure. The farmhouse is big. Three floors of potential activity kind of big. After over 3 hours of incredibly well acted scenes and biting dialogue I found myself contemplating: is the star of this show actually the set itself? August, Osage County is a compelling drama about a family in crisis. They’re dealing with problems from the past and issues from the present. The family has a complex history of intertwining story lines where everyone seems to be unravelling, all in this farmhouse. At the beginning of the story, the characters are reunited for the first time in years due to the death of the family patriarch, Beverly Weston. From the moment everyone is together in the same house (and on the same stage) you get a feel for how divided and disconnected this family actually is. This division is expertly paralleled in the different rooms of the house. Each room seemed to represent a different character or couple of characters. For example, the office den the story’s first scene opens in is representative of the character Beverly Weston: cluttered, old, and now dead. When any of the characters were in that room they seemed to reminisce about good times and old memories, much like Beverly did, who was tormented by a certain significant memory, which becomes the main plot revelation in the third act. The energy of the set could be measured by the house aesthetics. When the lights were on and up, the characters were lively and the dialogue was colorful. Once the lights would dim and characters would scurry off to their sleeping quarters they were confined to their own emotions, setting the mood for their surroundings, or was it the surroundings setting the mood for them? The way the set was â€Å"dressed† also revealed quite a bit about the family. The farmhouse was clustered with rich, atmospheric trinkets and furniture that subconsciously gave us (the audience) more depth into the lives of these people. The storage closet on the top floor, packed to the maximum with items never explored or mentioned in the story, is symbolic of the old, dusty secrets the family is hiding from one another. I found myself  thinking about that storage closet after the play was over. It wasn’t necessary to have for the purpose of acting out the play, but was most definitely included to add a visual aid in telling the story and providing some subtle metaphor. This family was full of secrets, packed to the brim and unexplored. Issues locked tightly behind closed doors. Johnna, the only character outside the family to live in the house, has her personal space where she sleeps up in the attic on the third floor, right next to that previously mentioned storage closet†¦ the one full of secrets. A heavy metaphor for her window into the lives of this family presented itself to me as I thought more about the proximity of her space to that closet. Here she was, a complete outsider with no personal history with this family, yet throughout the story various members of the Weston house would confide in her, even more than they did their own kin. Johnna is front and center in the pivotal final scene. The tormented mother Violet Weston, now all alone in her house after all the family secrets had been revealed and left out in the open to ferment, searches her home for anyone to talk to. Between floors in the farmhouse, which in itself speaks of where the characters might be in life, Johnna recites the haunting words from a T.S. Elliot poem: â€Å"This is the way the world ends, this is the way the world ends†. Lights out. The exit lights turn from dim to bright, the audience begins to clap as the cast makes their way to the front of the stage to take their bow, and I take one more look at all the colorful, twisted, complex characters, including the enormously complex and layered—literally—character of the farmhouse, who could unfortunately not bow.

Galileo vs. The Bible Essay - 707 Words

Galileo vs. The Bible Religion and science have always been conflicting studies. Religion, being based on faith, relies on the supernatural to explain life and being. Science, on the other hand, cannot do this. Scientists need to eliminate the possibility of the unexplainable in order to maintain and control group by which to measure other groups. The unexplainable I refer to are the miracles that are commonplace in all supernatural religions. Galileo lived in a time where church was state. The land was ruled according to the words of the bible, and anyone in opposition would be in contempt. Galileos scientific findings were therefore strongly shunned by the church. In 1615 Galileo attempted to explain how these findings came to be†¦show more content†¦Galileo also argues that the same God that gave us senses, reason, and intellect would not give us answers to questions that could be solved using them. He feels this is even truer with sciences such as astronomy, where so little of which is found in the Bible, pointing to the fact that the only other planet even mentioned is Venus. Continuing, he argues that since the Bible doesnt seem to answer the questions of the shape of Heaven or its location in relation to the Earth, why would it state the matter of an earth-centered universe. Quoting a high-ranked priest, he states: That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how heaven goes. Towards the conclusion of Galileos letter he offers an argument of truths. The argument basically states this: if the truth of the Bible conflicts with the truth of fact, and two truths cannot contradict, then one or the other is wrong. Since the truth of fact cannot be wrong, except for ignorance, then the scientific interpretations found in the Bible may therefore be in err. Galileos doesnt exactly feel that the Bible is wrong, he is just providing one more argument towards the difference in science and the Bible. The errors themselves, he states, are most likely due to the inability to affirm that allShow MoreRelatedEssay on Science and Relgion1232 Words   |  5 PagesDuring the scientific revolution many religious issues were taken up. One was the issue of the earth being the center of the Universe, which the Christian doctrine held up as the truth. Through the work of astronomers like Copernicus, Kepler and Galileo, much was learned about our universe. One thing that was lea rned was that the earth revolved around the Sun, along with all the other planets of our solar system. Also it was learned that the sun is only one star among hundreds of billions of otherRead MoreModern vs. Pre-modern Essay example1064 Words   |  5 PagesModern vs. Pre-modern There is one simple way to classify the difference between the modern and the pre-modern, and that would be to separate them by years. Unfortunately this would not be cut and dried; it would be a rough estimate because no one really knows when the change took place, or if there even was a change. What is known for sure is that things did change. The â€Å"â€Å"moderns† (became) set against â€Å"ancient† modes of thought and practice† (Shapin, p. 5), and this led to a so-called scientificRead MoreClash Between God And Science Essay1091 Words   |  5 Pagesmuch it has impacted human life. Science and biblical text have clashed since the era of Isaac Newton and Galileo. Biblical text and science disagree in many aspects, but people are able to pick sides on what he or she truly believes. Three instances of when Science and biblical text do not agree is the ideas of Adam and Eve vs. evolution, the flooding of the earth, and finally scientific law vs. miracles performed by Jesus Christ. The first instance of when biblical text and science do not agreeRead MoreConflicting Ideologies : Religion Vs. Science1713 Words   |  7 PagesMeyer 1 Eric Meyer Mr. Hensley AP 11 English Per. 3 3 February 2015 Conflicting Ideologies: Religion vs. Science in the Search for the Truth The vast majority of the world’s population is religious, with 84% affirming their belief in at least one god. Globally, 32% identify as Christian, 23% as Muslim, and 15% as Hindu (Langer), and 83% of all people in the United States associate with one denomination of Christianity or another (Harper). Nearly all people of faith claim that their religious ideologiesRead MoreCreation vs. Evolution Essay1147 Words   |  5 Pagesfeasible answer to the origins of the universe than the evolution theory does. Creation has the backings of the Bible, an extraordinarily credible book; where evolution provides a theory with many holes in it. Too frequently the Bible is considered a weak argument, but why? When using the Bible as a reference for any argument, the accuracy of the Bible is quickly questioned. The Bible, in fact, is actually one of the most proven books in history. The Old Testament is quoted in several ancient NearRead MoreThe Effects Of Clinical Depression On An Individual s Dreaming1485 Words   |  6 Pagesscientists, from Copernicus to Galileo to Newton believed (as did almost all Christians in their time) in a literal interpretation of the Bible s account of Creation. An important event in the history of this conflict occurred in Dayton, Tennessee in 1925. John Scopes, a high school biology teacher was on trial for contravening the state s Butler Act law. That legislation forbade the teaching of any theory that denies the story of the Divine Creation of man as taught in the Bible, and to teach insteadRead MoreEvolution Vs. Creation Essay1654 Words   |  7 Pagespioneered modern science believe in th e existence of God, and while studying science they sought to discover the universe God Has created, to see his laws and the details of His creation. Scientists such as Leonardo Da Vinchi, Copernicus, Keppler, Galileo, Cuvier, Linnaeus and Isaac Newton all studied science by faith. They believed in the existence of God and that the whole universe came into existence by his creation. And last but not least, probably considered to be the most intelligent genius ofRead MoreThe Heliocentric Theory vs. The Catholic Church Essay2163 Words   |  9 PagesThe Heliocentric Theory vs. The Catholic Church We view the world today as the Earth and planets revolving around the Sun. Naturally, this always wasnt the case. Aristotle created a model in which since God created the Earth and man, therefore everything should revolve around us, creating a geocentric model of the known universe. This model was widely accepted by the people, as well as the Church, since the theory was God-centered. It wasnt untilRead MoreWill Science And Religion Ever Reconcile?1920 Words   |  8 Pagesprinciples of its religion. Scientists had to carefully navigate the Church to avoid prosecution for heresy. Galileo Galilei, himself a dedicated Christian, inspired vigorous opposition from the Church. He worked between the 16th and 17th Centuries and championed Copernicus’ theory of heliocentrism, which placed the Sun at the centre of the universe instead of the Earth, despite the Bible stating ‘the Lord set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved’ . A principle such as his, acceptedRead MoreReligious Groups Responses On Science Groups1511 Words   |  7 PagesOluwatosin Adegbonmire Leh 355-A03W Prof Telliel 5/26/16 Religion Vs Science Research Topic: Religious groups responses on science group theories on how the world was formed in the modern era. In this essay, we are going to focus on religious group responses to science group theories on how the world was formed in the modern era. We see there has always being a conflict between religion and science groups, because they both believe in different ways on how