Authors
Jeffrey Koperski
Saginaw Valley State University
Abstract
Scientific knowledge is not merely a matter of reconciling theories and laws with data and observations. Science presupposes a number of metatheoretic shaping principles in order to judge good methods and theories from bad. Some of these principles are metaphysical and some are methodological. While many shaping principles have endured since the scientific revolution, others have changed in response to conceptual pressures both from within science and without. Many of them have theistic roots. For example, the notion that nature conforms to mathematical laws flows directly from the early modern presupposition that there is a divine Lawgiver. This interplay between theism and shaping principles is often unappreciated in discussions about the relation between science and religion. Today, of course, naturalists reject the influence of theism and prefer to do science on their terms. But as Robert Koons and Alvin Plantinga have argued, this is more difficult than is typically assumed. In particular, they argue, metaphysical naturalism is in conflict with several metatheoretic shaping principles, especially explanatory virtues such as simplicity and with scientific realism more broadly. These arguments will be discussed as well as possible responses. In the end, theism is able to provide justification for the philosophical foundations of science that naturalism cannot.
Keywords Contemporary Philosophy  Philosophy of Science
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 1811-833X
DOI 10.5840/eps201753354
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Ockham’s Razors: A User’s Manual.Elliott Sober - 2015 - Cambridge University Press.
The Existence of God.Richard Swinburne - 2004 - Oxford University Press.

View all 12 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

A New Epistemological Case for Theism.Christophe de Ray - 2022 - Religious Studies 58 (2):379-400.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Metatheoretic Shaping Principles: Where Science Meets Theology.Jeffrey Koperski - 2011 - In William Hasker Thomas Jay Oord & Dean Zimmerman (eds.), God in an Open Universe.
Naturalism and Moral Realism.Michael C. Rea - 2006 - In Thomas Crisp, David VanderLaan & Matthew Davidson (eds.), Knowledge and Reality: Essays in Honor of Alvin Plantinga (Philosophical Studies Series). Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 215-242.
What is This Naturalism Stuff All About?Robert C. Bishop - 2009 - Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology 29 (2):108-113.
Levin and Ghins on the “No Miracle” Argument and Naturalism.Mario Alai - 2012 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 2 (1):85-110.
Science and Belief in God: Concord, Not Conflict.Robert C. Koons - 2003 - In Paul Copan & Paul K. Moser (eds.), The Rationality of Theism. Routledge. pp. 77.
The Best Argument Against God.Graham Oppy - 2013 - Palgrave-Macmillan.
Science, Confirmation, and the Theistic Hypothesis.Keith Mckendree Parsons - 1986 - Dissertation, Queen's University at Kingston (Canada)
Methodology of Augustinian Science.S. Muhammad-Taqīy Mudarrisī - 2011 - Methodology of Social Sciences and Humanities (69):7-39.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-08-24

Total views
599 ( #13,766 of 2,505,994 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
63 ( #13,050 of 2,505,994 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes