Episode 72: Science Conflated with Secular Belief: Scientism

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 72.

John Haught also recognizes a second type of conflation.

This occurs when science is conflated with secular belief,

and the result is scientism.

In Quote 9, Haught writes,

"Scientism may be defined as the belief that science is the only reliable guide to truth.

Scientism, it must be emphasized,

is by no means the same thing as science.

For while science is a modest, reliable,

and fruitful method of learning some important things about the universe,

scientism is the assumption that science is

the only appropriate way to arrive at the totality of truth.

Scientism is a philosophical belief

(strictly speaking an epistemological one) that enshrines

science as the only completely trustworthy method of

putting the human mind in touch with objective reality."

Note the word belief in this passage,

Haught is absolutely correct in pointing out that

scientism is not science but instead a belief.

Haught then offers a few more criticisms of scientism.

First, he contends that it is metaphysically blind.

In Quote 10, he asserts,

"Without usually being aware of it,

scientific skeptics have uncritically fused,

that is conflated, the scientific method with scientism,

a belief system that assumes,

without any scientific demonstration,

that science is the only appropriate way to look at things."

This criticism by Haught is what we termed earlier as

scientism's metaphysical blindspot in the notes on page 59.

To use some of our categories,

scientism is a conflation of methodological naturalism and metaphysical naturalism.

Haught is also correct in arguing that there is

no scientific experiment to prove that science is the

best and only way to understand the world because this

would presuppose the effectiveness of science.

In other words, this would be a circular argument.

The scientific method is wonderful,

but it is limited to studying the physical world.

It cannot reach into metaphysical reality.

Another criticism of scientism by Haught is that he

contends it is ironically religious in character.

In Quote 11, Haught notes,

"Scientism is a kind of faith-commitment

not entirely unlike the kind we find in religion.

Devotees of scientism place their trust in the scientific method itself,

but no more than religious believers can they

scientifically demonstrate the truth of this faith.

Skeptics trust in science almost as though,

like the gods of religion,

it were our savior from the original sin of prescientific ignorance."

Note all the religious language in this passage.

In this way, scientism is like religion and supports

the idea of a wide definition of religion.

To move beyond these examples of conflation of science with

religious belief and science with secular belief,

the contrast relationship of science and religion suggests we need to

separate science and religion from each

other and recognize their fundamental differences.

First, with regards to science,

it deals with the how questions of nature.

In particular, science explores patterns and processes,

and looks for natural causes.

Science is restricted to the works of nature.

The contrast relationship emphasizes that religion

explores the large why questions of belief.

It deals with meaning and mystery, and ultimate causes.

In other words, religion focuses on the foundation

of nature: who or what is behind the physical world?

In this way, the contrast category

claims no conflict is possible between science and religion.

This is because science is limited to the physical,

while religion deals with the metaphysical.

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