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