science and christianity dave scott and daphne brenner
TRANSCRIPT
Science and Christianity
Dave Scott
and
Daphne Brenner
Science vs. Religion: Myth or Melee?
• The nature of interaction between the two disciplines is still debated today.
• Science is the paradigm of truth and rationality.
• Religion has yet to be proven irrational or a matter of private, subjective opinion.
The Debate about Scientific Realism
• The majority of modern scientists embrace realism.
• Most debates between Creationists and evolutionists assume scientific realism.
• There are three main schools of thought regarding scientific realism.
Views of Science
R ation a l R ea lism
P h en om en a lism O p era tion is m P rag m atism C on s tru c tive E m p iric ism
R ation a l N on rea lism N on ra tion a l N on rea lism
V iew s o f S c ien ce
Rational Realism
• Scientific theories are true or approximately true.
• A mature scientific theory makes existence claims.
• Rationality is an objective notion and conceptual relativism is false.
• A scientific theory will embody certain epistemic virtues.
Rational Realism
• The aim of science is a literally true picture of the world.
Rational Nonrealism
• Science is rational in an objective, nonrelativist sense.
• Theoretical terms do not refer to the real world.
• The real world lies beyond what our senses tell us.
• Science gives inaccurate descriptions.
Phenomenalism• Scientific knowledge is about what we can
perceive with our senses.
• That which cannot be perceived cannot be supposed to exist within scientific theories.
• Theoretical terms do not represent entities that exist.
• Laws of nature and theories are nothing but records of past experiences which can be used to anticipate future experience.
Operationism
• Theoretical terms are shorthand devices for laboratory operations.
• Theoretical entities do not really exist.
• The laws of science are not true descriptions of the underlying structure of the world.
• These things are just sets of lab operations and recorded numbers in a lab notebook.
Pragmatism
• Science merely aims to find theories that work, not truer and truer ones about the world.
• There are two types of problems: empirical and conceptual.
• Theories which solve problems will embody certain epistemic virtues which might not be true.
Constructive Empiricism
• Science aims to give empirically adequate theories.
• Acceptance of a theory involves a belief only that it is empirically adequate.
• That which is accepted might not be real.
Nonrational Nonrealism
• There is no objective sense in which science is rational.
• There are no givens.
• Rival theories or paradigms cannot be compared.
• Science is simply rules arbitrarily drafted by scientists.
The Limits of Science
• The validation of science is a philosophical issue, not a scientific one.
• Science assumes that the senses are reliable and give accurate information about the physical world and not merely successive sense impressions.
Presuppositions of Science
• Perception: Perceptual realism or representative dualism.
• The mind is rational and the universe can be understood.
• Uniformity of nature must be assumed to justify induction.
• Assumes the existence of universals.
Presuppositions of Science
• Assumes that the laws of logic are true and that truth exists.
• Assumes certain moral, epistemic, and methodological values.
• The existence of boundary conditions.
• The general characteristics of science are repeatability, observability, and empirical testability.
Science and Theology are Compatible
• Both disciplines speak about the origin of the cosmos, man and life in general.
• They describe the same reality using different methods
• Complementary view: How? What? + Who? Why?
• Theology asserts that God acts directly and indirectly
• The Christian worldview is most congruent with science
• Ex nihilo creation• Inadequacy of macroevolutionary theory• plants and animals created within fixed limits• “Man ain’t no
. monkey!”• Catastrophism in geology• Young Earth
Creation Science: Outlined
Scientific Validity of Creation Science
• Supernatural terms (God) can function within theories describing the natural
• Biblical roots do not disqualify truth
• Makes predictions
• No less open to revision than modern evolutionary science
Support for a Literal Genesis Account
• Yom- Hebrew word -“Day”– In Mosaic books, a numerical adjective always
means a literal 24 hours– In OT, 97% of its 1900 uses, it is literal
• Chronological order usually the backbone of Biblical narrative
• Genesis 1&2 set the tone for a historical narrative
Flaws in Macroevolutionary Theory
• Myth of the Prebiotic Soup
• Limited Genetic Potential
• Problems in the fossil record
• 2nd Law of Thermodynamics says “A chance of 1 in 10 to the 40,000th power”
Closing Statements
• Science is not infallible
• Religion is not irrational
• Christian theology is integrable with science
• Creation science is scientific
• Darwinian science is not proven fact