Episode 68: Conflict Relationship & Scientific Skeptics

Loading...

來自 University of Alberta 的課程

Science & Religion 101

37 個評分

University of Alberta

Science & Religion 101

37 個評分

This course examines the nature of both science and religion and attempts to explore the possible relationships between them. The primary purpose is to dispel the popular myth that science and religion are entrenched in a never-ending conflict. As a result, this course argues that if the limits of both science and religion are respected, then their relationship can be complementary. Topics include: Science and Religion Categories and Foundational Principles, Definitions of Science and Religion, Science-Religion Models and Relationships, Intelligent Design and Natural Revelation, the Galileo Affair, Geology and Noah’s Flood, Evolution and Darwin’s Religious Beliefs, the Modern “Evolution” vs. “Creation” Debate, the Problem of Evil, and Interpretations of the Biblical Accounts of Origins in Genesis 1-11. The course employs a Constructive Teaching Style in order that students can develop their personal views on the relationship between science and religion and on each of the topics listed above. St. Joseph's College is a Catholic, undergraduate, liberal arts college on the University of Alberta campus. It is an independent institution that is affiliated with the University of Alberta.

從本節課中

Models on the Relationships between Science & Religion

This is one of the most important weeks in the course. We outline the Science and Religion models of two of the founding members of this new academic discipline. Their models each include four different relationships between Science and Religion. John Haught’s model incorporates the relationships of Conflict, Contrast, Contact, and Confirmation. Ian Barbour has Conflict, Independence, Dialogue, and Integration relationships in his model. During this week, we will consider the hermeneutical principle of Historical Criticism. This is the notion that ancient Near Eastern motifs of origins—De Novo Creation, Lost Idyllic Age, Great Flood, and Tribal Formation—have been re-cycled and re-interpreted in the biblical accounts of origins (Genesis 1-11).

Episode 67: Key Thoughts: Science & Religion Model of John F. Haught. (1) Conflict Relationship5:25

Episode 68: Conflict Relationship & Scientific Skeptics4:12

Episode 69: Conflict Relationship & Biblical Literalists. (2) Contrast Relationship4:45

Episode 70: Science Conflated with Religious Belief: Concordism4:22

Episode 71: Excursus: God-of-the-Gaps4:57

Episode 72: Science Conflated with Secular Belief: Scientism4:49

Episode 73: (3) Contact Relationship5:37

Episode 74: Contact Relationship (Continued)5:49

Episode 75: (4) Confirmation Relationship4:44

Episode 76: Confirmation Relationship (Continued) Conclusion: Haught’s Science & Religion Model5:46

Episode 77: Science & Religion Model of Ian G. Barbour4:03

Episode 78: (1) Conflict Relationship. Scientific Materialists4:15

Episode 79: Scientific Materialists (Continued)5:16

Episode 80: Biblical Literalists3:37

Episode 81: Biblical Literalists (Continued)5:03

Episode 82: (2) Independence Relationship3:59

Episode 83: (3) Dialogue Relationship4:38

Episode 84: Dialogue Relationship (Continued). (4) Integration Relationship4:42

Episode 85: Examples of Natural Theology (Intelligent Design Arguments)4:41

Episode 86: Natural Theology & Intelligent Design (Continued)6:58

Episode 87: Excursus: Intelligent Design Theory. Theology of Nature6:31

Episode 88: Theology of Nature: Examples of Reformation5:03

Episode 89: Conclusion to Barbour’s Model. Toward a Working Model of Science & Religion (Lamoureux)7:36

Hermeneutics 8: Scope of Cognitive Competence14:53

Hermeneutics 9: Historical Criticism6:20

與講師見面

Denis Lamoureux
Associate Professor
St. Joseph's College

Episode 68.

John Haught defines the scientific skeptics in quote 2.

They are people who reject religion in the name of science.

From their perspective, religion is the oppressor and the enemy of truth and

enlightenment, and science is the liberator and the savior.

The scientific skeptics have a number of criticisms against religion.

First, they state that there are epistemological problems.

In particular, religion is not testable, and it is not objective.

As quote 3 states, religion tries to sneak by without providing

any concrete evidence, that is, scientific evidence, of God's existence.

But here's the question, do God and

religion lend themselves to scientific methods and standards?

Second, scientific skeptics claim that there are historical problems

with religion.

They often point to the religious prosecution of Galileo in the 17th century

and the church's rejection of Darwin in the 19th century.

But is this good history?

We'll examine both of these historical episodes later in the course.

Third, there are hermeneutical problems.

Skeptics claim that the Bible is full of contradictions.

Ironically, scientific skeptics

are literalists just like young earth creationists.

But is this good hermeneutics?

I'm sure you're developing an opinion on this topic.

Finally, scientific skeptics claim that religion has ethical problems.

They ask the age-old question, why is there suffering and evil in the world?

And indeed, this is a serious challenge for religion.

Why would an all-loving, all-powerful, and all-knowing God allow

the Holocaust and the murder of six million Jewish people by the Nazis?

And yet religious people just keep on believing.

But is the problem of suffering and evil that simple?

In the last section of this course, we'll explore this challenging issue.

The conflict relationship of the scientific skeptics is the common

perception of science and religion by those who reject religion.

With regards to religion, they believe it is based on mindless faith.

In particular, it is a priori reasoning, that is, it uses deduction.

The Latin a priori means from something earlier and

which is not based on observation and experience.

This method of arguing goes from the general rule to the particular case.

In other words, religious people begin with the religion and scriptures, and

then they attempt to explain the world.

Scientific skeptics view religion as merely emotional and irrational.

In sum, they contain that religion is nothing but subjective nonsense.

In sharp contrast,

scientific skeptics believe that science is based on hard facts and logic.

It is a posteriori reasoning, that is, it uses induction.

The Latin a posteriori means from something later and

that it is based on observation and experience.

This approach moves from the particular case to the general rule.

In other words, scientists collect facts and

construct scientific theories describing reality.

Scientific skeptics believe that science is dispassionate and rational.

And in particular, it is purely objective.

Now I'm sure that you've noticed that the science versus religion relationship

of the scientific skeptics is trapped in simple dichotomies and conflations and

that they are entrenched in black-and-white and either/or thinking.

End of episode.

探索我們的目錄

免費加入並獲得個性化推薦、更新和優惠。

Coursera 致力於普及全世界最好的教育，它與全球一流大學和機構合作提供在線課程。

© 2019 Coursera Inc. 保留所有權利。

通過 App Store 下載

通過 Google Play 獲取