We believe in science. To be honest, we’d have to be crazy not to. Subject to the evidence of course. In our latest edition of
Case magazine we explore the theme 'Believing Science'. The various writers in this issue acknowledge that science has taught us much about our
world and how it works. It has led to amazing technologies hardly dreamt
of before: test-tube babies, heart transplants, mobile phones, nuclear energy, space
exploration. The news is full of the latest research that tells us all sorts of
things, from what the surface of Mars is like, to whether people who drink red
wine are healthier; from the development of new high-yield crops, to exciting
new treatment possibilities for autism.
Science—and our acceptance of it—are so much a part of our
lives that it is hard to imagine things being otherwise. But in terms of human
history, science is a relatively recent phenomenon, and one that assumes a
particular view of the natural world as regular and ordered.
In an excellent piece of historical analysis,
Peter Harrison discusses the rise of Western
science, and in particular, the role Christian theology played in
legitimising the acceptance of the science we now take so for granted.
However it is not always easy to believe what science tells
us, for a variety of reasons.
Sometimes
scientific findings seem altogether too strange to be believable, as
John Polkinghorne points out in his short essay. For our minds, which have developed their intuitions
about how the world works amidst trees, tables and teenagers, such theories as
quantum physics or relativity are difficult even to conceive, let alone believe.
We need to rely not on what seems obvious, but what the evidence points to. And
yet it remains the case that these same minds, which darkly reflect the mind of
their creator, are able to explore and understand this ‘mysterious universe’.
Another stumbling block to believing science is the
difficulty of working out exactly what it is that the science tells us. Using
climate science as a case study,
John Quinn explores some of the factors
contributing to this difficulty. Science, he points out, is not a homogeneous endeavour.
There are many different branches which employ different methods to study
phenomena of varying complexity. Our confidence in the outcomes needs to be
weighted accordingly. Taking another step back, for the non-specialist, there
is the problem of sorting through the different accounts of what the science
tells us via politicians, the media and other channels. Which ‘experts’ should
we believe? Which of the conflicting reports can we trust? What approach should
someone seeking to be a responsible citizen take, and is it any different to a
Christian approach?
As well as addressing these aspects of ‘belief in science’,
this issue of
Case Magazine also
looks at the ‘science of belief’ with two articles from a new and growing field
of research,
cognitive science of religion (CSR).
Religious belief and practice are near
universal, but why is that the case? Can the study of human psychology throw
any light on this? According to
Jonathan Jong, the research indicates the answer
is ‘yes’. Our minds are quick to attribute things that happen in the world to
other agents or beings ‘out there’, and to readily believe in them.
Other features of human psychology are
identified that help explain why it is that some religious traditions spread
and flourish while others go nowhere.
Justin Barrett lays out what ‘natural religion’ looks like
according to current research—the characteristics of the kind of religion that
comes naturally to human minds.
He then
looks at how this ‘natural religion’ relates to theology in established
religious traditions like Christianity, and also at the potential for
interaction between theology and cognitive science.
Because of its direct reference to religion, CSR is likely
to be keenly watched by religious apologists and atheists alike. Both Jong and
Barrett discuss the implications of CSR for Christian and other religious belief.
Does explaining religious belief by appealing to human psychology mean that religion
is ‘explained away’? While some have argued that this is the case, Jong and
Barrett disagree, maintaining the distinction between explaining something and
explaining it away is critical. He also suggests a number of strategies that
are open to apologists.
Robert Stening’s review of
The Principles of Neurotheology by Andrew Newberg
, resonates with Jong and Barrett’s paper. Neurotheology
is another field that seeks to investigate religious phenomena, this time
using the methods of neuroscience. Our final review by Cath Finney Lamb also
addresses religious belief but from a completely different angle, with a
discussion of Elmer Thiessen’s important book,
The Ethics of Evangelism.
For any Christian, a consideration of science and its claims
is vital to an apologetic defence of one’s faith. We hope you enjoy this issue
of Case Magazine.
Want to read some more?
Dr John Quinn's article on '
Finding the Truth in the Climate Change Debate' is a free download
HERE. You can buy this single issue of
Case magazine
HERE or become a CASE Associate for $55 AUD and receive all four quarterly issues as part of your subscription
HERE.