- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
Scientific and Religious Worldviews: Antagonism, Non‐Antagonistic Incommensurability and Complementarity
Heythrop Journal 47 (3):349-366 (2006)
Abstract
This article reviews three basic ways in which the relationship between Abrahamic religion and science has been construed: as fundamentally antagonistic; as non‐antagonistically incommensurable; and as complementary. Unfortunately, while each construal seems to offer benefits to the religious believer, none, as the article demonstrates, is without considerable cost.Author's Profile
Links
PhilArchive
External links
(no proxy)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Through your library
- Sign in / register and customize your OpenURL resolver
- Configure custom resolver
My notes
Similar books and articles
Scientific and religious worldviews: Antagonism, non-antagonistic incommensurability and complementarity.Dr Victoria S. Harrison - 2006 - Heythrop Journal 47 (3):349–366.
Worldviews: a Christian response to religious pluralism.Anthony J. Steinbronn - 2007 - St. Louis, MO: Concordia Pub. House.
Incommensurabilidad y relatividad. Una revisión de la tesis de Thomas Kuhn.Andrés Rivadulla - 2003 - Revista de Filosofía (Madrid) 28 (2):237-259.
Elisabeth Ströker: Wissenschaftsphilosophische Studien. Vittorio Klostermann. Frankfurt am Main, 1989. 64 pp + VIII. [REVIEW]Andrés Rivadulla - 1990 - Revista de Filosofía (Madrid) 4 (2):277.
A Critique of the Translational Approach to Incommensurability.Xinli Wang - 1998 - Prima Philosophia 11 (3):293-306.
Multisemiosis and Incommensurability.S. K. Arun Murthi & Sundar Sarukkai - 2009 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 23 (3):297-311.
Kuhn’s Incommensurability Thesis: What’s the Argument?Moti Mizrahi - 2015 - Social Epistemology 29 (4):361-378.
Arguments from design: A self-defeating strategy?Victoria Harrison - 2005 - Philosophia 33 (1-4):297-317.
Is There an Incommensurability between Superseding Theories? On the Validity of the Incommensurability Thesis.A. Polikarov - 1993 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 24 (1):127 - 146.
The emergence of holographic perspective-toward a convergence of scientific and religious worldviews.T. Vadaya - 1987 - Journal of Dharma 12 (3):261-265.
Analytics
Added to PP
2014-03-19
Downloads
47 (#323,378)
6 months
6 (#431,022)
2014-03-19
Downloads
47 (#323,378)
6 months
6 (#431,022)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
References found in this work
The impact of science on modern conceptions of rationality.Hilary Putnam - 1981 - Synthese 46 (3):359 - 382.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-7c76586df8-hc2g5 uwo