Long time ago, people observed nature from an integrated perspective; namely, it was a non-separable concept of religeon, philosophy and science.
After that, physical science had alienated human subjectivity (belief) from the theory. It seemed that the objectivity of science succeeded in understanding nature. Yes. Actually it did. However, we have to realize that the theory of sciences has been constructed by human, which implies that there has been unremovable subjectivity in doing science. In other words, there is something beyond subjectivity and objectivity toward making science. That also makes us think of what the meaning of doing science is...
At certain level, it is hard to distinguish between subjectivity and objectivity. Scientists ususally use their own aesthetic sense toward the theory although there is no definition of that sense. Simultaneously, almost all scientists know how it can critically be used at some situation.
I will introduce the historical dilenmma between science and scientists' belief. The belief could be the aesthetic emotion or the ultimate law of nature. I used the word, god for the symbolical expression. However, it is not related to any specific religeons, so I used "god" instead of "God." It may give some open-ended question to any people.
Science and Belief (Presentation as a PDF)
Science and Belief Japanese Version