The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Science and religion in conflict, part 1: preliminaries

Science and religion in conflict, part 1: preliminaries
Science and religion in conflict, part 1: preliminaries
Science and religion have been described as the “two dominant forces in our culture”. As such, the relation between them has been a matter of intense debate, having profound implications for deeper understanding of our place in the universe. One position naturally associated with scientists of a materialistic outlook is that science and religion are contradictory, incompatible worldviews; however, a great deal of recent literature criticises this “conflict thesis” as simple-minded, essentially ignorant of the nature of religion and its philosophical and theological underpinnings. In this first part of a two-part article, I set out the wide-ranging background required for a proper understanding of the debate as a preliminary for the second part, in which Ian Barbour ’s influential four-fold typology of science-religion relations is critically assessed, leading to the conclusion that the conflict model is not to be so easily dismissed.
Science and religion, Philosophy of science, Philosophy of religion, Theism, Deism. Atheism, Scientism
Damper, Robert
6e0e7fdc-57ec-44d4-bc0f-029d17ba441d
Damper, Robert
6e0e7fdc-57ec-44d4-bc0f-029d17ba441d

Damper, Robert (2022) Science and religion in conflict, part 1: preliminaries. Foundations of Science. (doi:10.1007/s10699-022-09870-0).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Science and religion have been described as the “two dominant forces in our culture”. As such, the relation between them has been a matter of intense debate, having profound implications for deeper understanding of our place in the universe. One position naturally associated with scientists of a materialistic outlook is that science and religion are contradictory, incompatible worldviews; however, a great deal of recent literature criticises this “conflict thesis” as simple-minded, essentially ignorant of the nature of religion and its philosophical and theological underpinnings. In this first part of a two-part article, I set out the wide-ranging background required for a proper understanding of the debate as a preliminary for the second part, in which Ian Barbour ’s influential four-fold typology of science-religion relations is critically assessed, leading to the conclusion that the conflict model is not to be so easily dismissed.

Text
part1 - Accepted Manuscript
Download (1MB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 25 August 2022
e-pub ahead of print date: 25 August 2022
Keywords: Science and religion, Philosophy of science, Philosophy of religion, Theism, Deism. Atheism, Scientism

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 472740
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/472740
PURE UUID: 0dd1f190-9541-4200-8d3c-f0a41ec1a195

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 16 Dec 2022 17:30
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 07:37

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Robert Damper

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×