Science and the Christian Faith Brent Royuk June 11, 2006
The Plan Week 1: The Nature of Science Week 2: Ways to Relate S&R Week 3: Creation/Evolution Week 4: We ll see
Why science in a Bible class? God s other book Science is seen as defining reality for non-christians Find out how Christian scientists view their vocation Discuss controversies, i.e. origins Use scientific ideas to explore faith Compare and Contrast Curiosity- learn something new My personal interest
Goals: Week 2 Review a little bit of the NOS stuff from last week. Compare and contrast the two approaches to truth in S&R. Categorize and discuss several ways of relating S&R (the taxonomic approach). Caution: When discussing philosophy of science, keep in mind that there is no consensus on this stuff.
Last Week: Foundations of Science Curiosity Reality Order Empiricism
Last Week: Doing Science The Four Processes of Science From Gil Daenzer 1. Observe Nature (Facts) 2. Find Order (Laws) 3. Build Models (Theories) 4. Explain & Predict
Scientific Laws An observed regularity Laws are simple. Scientific laws are descriptive, not prescriptive. Scientific laws are discovered, not invented. God makes laws, not man.
Scientific Theories A scientific theory is a wellsubstantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses. --National Academy of Sciences Theories are the conceptual product of science God doesn t make scientific theories, we do.
Final NOS Thoughts A law is not a proven theory, but do theories ever become laws? Are there corresponding conceptual processes in religion?
Andy s Question Isn t evolution often presented as a fact? Since it s a theory, shouldn t it be presented with more caution and provisionality?
Andy s Question First Answer Metaphysicality vs. practicality Relativity: It s only a theory Even laws are metaphysically uncertain Contrast is sharp in the S&R context And we re not doing science here
Andy s Question Second Answer Even though theoretical knowledge is provisional, it can still be certain, or at least pretty darn certain. Does the earth really go around the sun? Do atoms really exist? Is genetic information really encoded in DNA? Does continental drift really occur? Is the earth really 4.5 billion years old? Are humans and chimpanzees really descended from common ancestors? Is space really 10 or 11-dimensional, with 6 or 7 of the dimensions compactified? These answers are all of the provisional, probabilistic, what-have-you-done-for-me-lately variety.
Andy s Question Third Answer Evolutionary Exceptionality Some evolutionary scientists have done some very deliberate category-crossing to counter creationist arguments. Stephen Jay Gould, Hen s Teeth and Horse s Toes: In the American vernacular, "theory" often means "imperfect fact" part of a hierarchy of confidence running downhill from fact to theory to hypothesis to guess. Thus creationists can (and do) argue: evolution is "only" a theory, and intense debate now rages about many aspects of the theory. If evolution is less than a fact, and scientists can't even make up their minds about the theory, then what confidence can we have in it? Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts do not go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's, but apples did not suspend themselves in mid-air, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from apelike ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other, yet to be discovered.
Andy s Question Third Answer Stephen Jay Gould, Hen s Teeth and Horse s Toes: Moreover, "fact" does not mean "absolute certainty." The final proofs of logic and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty only because they are not about the empirical world... In science, "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent." I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms. Evolutionists have been clear about this distinction between fact and theory from the very beginning, if only because we have always acknowledged how far we are from completely understanding the mechanisms (theory) by which evolution (fact) occurred.
Science and Truth Does science find truth? Are facts true? Are laws true? Are theories true?
God and Truth How do we determine truth in religion? Scripture Revelation Why do we ultimately trust the Bible as the revealed Word of God? Faith How do revealed truths compare to scientific truths? Truth vs. truth
God and Truth Does God really exist? Did God really create the universe? Was Jesus really born to a virgin mother? Are we really born sinful? Did Jesus really save us by dying on a cross? Are we really going to live forever in heaven after we die?
truth vs. Truth Empirical vs. Revelatory Provisional vs. Absolute Tentative vs. Eternal Skepticism vs. Faith
truth vs. Truth So how do the two truths relate to each other? Truth is more important than truth, right? Can Truth inform truth? Does Truth trump truth? Can truth change Truth?
S&R Models Let s make a catalog of approaches We should try to: 1. Be fairly comprehensive. 2. Include perspectives that people actually have.
S&R Models Ian Barbour, Religion and Science, 1997. Four Ways of Relating: 1. Conflict 2. Independence 3. Dialogue 4. Integration (Arrow symbols idea from Daniel Johnson)
Massimo Pigliucci S&R Models
S&R Models Richard Bube, Putting It All Together, 1995. Seven Patterns for Relating Science and the Christian Faith: 1. Natural Theology Science Demands Christian Theology 2. Compartmentalism Science and Christian Theology are Unrelated 3. Bible-Only Christian Theology in Spite of Science 4. Science-Only Science Has Destroyed Christian Theology 5. Scientific Theology Science Redefines Christian Theology 6. Complementarity 7. New Synthesis
S&R Models Richard Bube, Putting It All Together, 1995. Seven Patterns for Relating Science and the Christian Faith: 1. Natural Theology Science Demands Christian Theology 2. Compartmentalism Science and Christian Theology are Unrelated 3. Bible-Only Christian Theology in Spite of Science 4. Science-Only Science Has Destroyed Christian Theology 5. Scientific Theology Science Redefines Christian Theology 6. Complementarity 7. New Synthesis
S&R Models