izpis_h1_title_alt

Dialog med znanostjo in religijo pri Alistru E. McGrathu : doktorska disertacija
Pohar, Borut (Author), Petkovšek, Robert (Mentor) More about this mentor... This link opens in a new window

.pdfPDF - Presentation file, Download (3,22 MB)

Abstract
V disertaciji raziskujemo dialog med znanostjo in religijo pri Alistru E. McGrathu. Na podlagi analize njegovih del želimo najti rešitve za probleme, ki izhajajo iz dediščine logičnega pozitivizma in s katerimi se krščanstvo srečuje v sodobnem svetu. Nekateri bi radi izključili vero iz javne razprave. V šolskem sistemu se srečujemo s problemom naivnega realizma. Obstaja splošno prepričanje, da je možna le ena sama znanstvena metoda, pri čemer se zdi ontološki redukcionizem edina možna izbira. In kot zadnje, vernike obtožujejo nerazumnosti in kot edino razumno možnost predstavljajo naturalizem. Na vse te probleme smo našli odgovore pri McGrathu, za katerega trdimo, da je postpozitivistično filozofijo znanosti uporabil v apologetski namen. V prvem in drugem poglavju predstavljamo razloge za poživitev, gojenje in preučevanje dialoga med religijo in znanostjo. Ti razlogi so: ontološki, zgodovinski, sociološki, filozofski in epistemični. Ontološki razlog trdi, da dialog zahteva sámo krščansko razumevanje narave resničnosti, ki je utemeljeno v nauku o stvarjenju. Ker je Bog naredil svet, se tudi razodeva prek njega. Zgodovinski razlogi so naslednji: teologija se je v zgodovini vedno opirala na druge discipline, torej ni razloga, da se ne bi tudi na filozofijo znanosti; zgodovinarji znanosti so pokazali, da je interakcija med znanostjo in religijo zgodovinsko dejstvo, kar pomeni, da so v zgodovini verska prepričanja vplivala na znanost, Cerkev pa je bila v zgodovini večinoma odprta do izsledkov naravne filozofije oziroma znanosti. Med sociološke razloge smo uvrstili naslednja dejstva: izkazalo se je, da je stara paradigma sekularizacije napačna, kar pomeni, da religija ostaja kot pomemben družbeni dejavnik, s katerim moramo stopiti v dialog; pojav novega ateizma kaže, da je dialog nujno potreben, saj nepoznavanje drugače mislečih vodi v konflikt ali celo v nasilje; v družbi še vedno obstajajo številni miti o znanosti in religiji – na primer mit, da sta religija in znanost v konfliktu –, zaradi česar moramo preučevati njun dialog. Kot filozofski razlog za dialog smo podali premik v filozofiji znanosti, ki je odprl nove možnosti za dialog. Postpozitivistični filozofi, kakor na primer Karl Popper, Norwood Hanson in Thomas Kuhn, so izpostavili šibke točke logičnega pozitivizma, na primer problem teoretske obloženosti, ki postavlja pod vprašaj kriterije razmejitve, s katerim so pozitivisti hoteli teologijo odstraniti iz domene znanosti. Kot zadnji razlog za dialog omenjamo epistemološki razlog oziroma kritični realizem. McGrat je eden od avtorjev, ki se prišteva med kritične realiste. Elementi njegovega kritičnega realizma so: kritični realizem je a posteriori disciplina; resničnost je zaznamovana z redom in razslojena; resničnost predstavljamo z modeli oziroma analogijami, ki so nezadostna in selektivna predstava te resničnosti; na nastanek modelov vplivajo tudi družbeni dejavniki. Posledica kritičnega realizma je spoznanje, da je dialog nujnost, saj je naše vedenje komplementarno in zato potrebujemo različne discipline, od katerih ima vsaka svojo metodo. V tretjem poglavju smo predstavili dialog z znanostjo kot sredstvo krščanske apologetike. Gre v bistvu za zadnji element McGrathovega kritičnega realizma, ki je upravičenost védenja na podlagi vrednostne sodbe. Sodobna krščanska apologetika ima namreč za nalogo dokazati upravičenost oziroma razumnost verovanja, pri čemer se opira predvsem na naslednja načela pozitivistične in postpozitivistične filozofije znanosti: hermenevtični model znanstvene razlage; razlikovanje med kontekstom odkritja in kontekstom upravičenja; teoretska obloženost opazovanj, pomenov in dejstev; holistična in kontrastivna poddoločenost; znanstvene epistemične vrednote; vrednostna sodba. Vsi ti elementi imajo svoj apologetski pomen, kar smo še posebej izpostavili v četrtem poglavju, v katerem smo predstavili prenovljeno naravno teologijo kot prostor srečanja med krščansko teologijo in znanostjo. Prenovljena naravna teologija je prostor, kjer je McGrath na podlagi epistemičnih vrednot – kakor so empirično ujemanje, konzonanca, učinkovitost reševanja problemov in moč unifikacije –, vrednostne sodbe in dobrega občutka presodil, da je krščanstvo bolj razumna izbira kakor naturalizem. Na ta način smo podali rešitev na zastavljeni problem domnevne nerazumnosti krščanske vere in pokazali, da lahko znanost in krščanstvo soobstajata na način medsebojne obogatitve. V zadnjem, petem poglavju, smo ovrednotili McGrathov pristop na podlagi okrožnice Vera in razum. Izkazalo se je, da je McGrathov pristop presenetljivo skladen s katoliškimi načeli v zvezi z odnosom med vero in razumom. Skupne točke med McGrathom in Janezom Pavlom II. so naslednje: oba avtorja obravnavata problem logičnega pozitivizma; razum je le relativno avtonomen in potrebuje pomoč razodetja; oba iščeta skupen imenovalec z naslovljenci; ne zanašata se na dokaze, ampak poudarjata pomen sledi oziroma znamenj; oba imata dialoški pristop; oba izpostavljata pomen osebnega pričevanja; poleg filozofije kot temeljni vir uporabljata tudi Božjo besedo in cerkvene očete; oba sta prepričana, da je vsaka racionalnost umeščena v tradicijo ter da tradicija ni nekaj statičnega, ampak se spreminja; oba podajata kritiko zmotnih filozofskih sistemov; obadva zagovarjata metafiziko in filozofski pluralizem in sta prepričana, da je etika sestavni del razprave o veri in razumu. V sklepu disertacije smo med drugim predstavili kriterije, na podlagi katerih lahko zagovarjamo razumnost krščanstva. V disertaciji smo tako pokazali, da lahko na podlagi McGrathovega prispevka v zvezi z dialogom med znanostjo in religijo podamo odgovore na temeljne probleme, ki jih krščanstvo srečuje v sodobni družbi. V tem je – menimo – naš prispevek k razvoju krščanske apologetike.

Language:Slovenian
Keywords:McGrath, dialog, znanost, kritični realizem, logični pozitivizem, postpozitivizem, naravna teologija, apologetika, Vera in razum
Work type:Doctoral dissertation (mb31)
Tipology:2.08 - Doctoral Dissertation
Organization:TEOF - Theological Faculty
Year:2018
Publisher:[B. Pohar]
Number of pages:XI, 491 str.
UDC:165.82McGrath A.(043.3)
COBISS.SI-ID:7882330 Link is opened in a new window
Views:646
Downloads:424
Metadata:XML RDF-CHPDL DC-XML DC-RDF
 
Average score:(0 votes)
Your score:Voting is allowed only to logged in users.
:
Share:AddThis
AddThis uses cookies that require your consent. Edit consent...

Secondary language

Language:English
Title:Dialogue between science and religion in Alister McGrath
Abstract:
This dissertation studies the dialogue between science and religion in Alister E. McGrath. Based on an analysis of his works, it seeks to find solutions to the problems originating in the heritage of logical positivism, which Christianity is facing in the modern world. Some seek to exclude faith from public debate. The school system is faced with the problem of naive realism. It is a universally held belief that there can only be one scientific method, and ontological reductionism seems the only possible choice. Finally, believers are accused of irrationality, while naturalism is presented as the only rational choice. A solution for all these problems has been found in McGrath and it is claimed here that he used the postpositivist philosophy of science to the apologetic purpose. The first and the second chapter present the reasons for reviving, maintaining, and studying the dialogue between religion and science. These reasons are ontological, historical, sociological, philosophical and epistemic. The ontological reason is that the dialogue is demanded by the Christian understanding of the nature of reality, which is based on the doctrine of creation. Since God created the world, He reveals himself through it. The historical reasons are as follows: throughout history, theology has always relied on other disciplines and there is no reason why philosophy of science should be an exception; historians of science have demonstrated that the interaction between science and religion is a historical fact, which means that throughout history science was influenced by religious beliefs, and the Church was historically mostly open to the findings of natural philosophy and science. The sociological reasons are: the old paradigm of secularization has been proven wrong, which means that religion remains a significant factor in society, with which a dialogue must be established; the phenomenon of new atheism indicates that this dialogue is necessary, because ignoring those who think differently leads to conflict and even violence; society still upholds various myths about science and religion – e.g. the myth about a conflict between religion and science – which is why the dialogue between them must be studied. The shift in the philosophy of science, which opened new possibilities for the dialogue, is stated here as the philosophical reason for the dialogue. Postpositivist philosophers such as Karl Popper, Norwood Hanson, and Thomas Kuhn exposed the weaknesses of logical positivism, e.g. the problem of theory-loading, which questions the criteria of demarcation, used by positivists in order to exclude theology from the domain of science. As the last reason for the dialogue, the epistemological reason or critical realism is mentioned. As an author, McGrath is considered a critical realist. The elements of his critical realism are: critical realism is an a posteriori discipline; reality is characterized by order and is stratified; reality can be presented by models and analogies, which are insufficient and selective presentations of said reality; the creation of models is influenced, among others, by social factors. The consequence of critical realism is the discovery that dialogue is a necessity, because our behaviour is complementary and therefore different disciplines are needed, each of them with their own method. The third chapter presents the dialogue with science as a means of Christian apologetics. This is effectively the last element of McGrath’s critical realism, which is the justification of knowing based on a value judgement. The task of modern Christian apologetics is to prove that it is justified and reasonable to believe; in this task, it relies predominantly on the following principles of the positivist and postpositivist philosophy of science: the hermeneutic model of scientific explanation; the differentiation between the context of discovery and the context of justification; theory-loading of observations, meanings and facts; holistic and contrastive underdetermination; scientific epistemic values; value judgement. All these elements have an apologetic meaning, as pointed out in the fourth chapter, in which renewed natural theology is presented as the meeting point between Christian theology and science. Renewed natural theology is the realm where McGrath judged, on the basis of epistemic values – such as empirical agreement, consonance, problem-solving effectiveness and unification power –, value judgement, and good sense, that Christianity is a more rational choice than naturalism. In this way, a solution has been provided to the presented problem of the alleged irrationality of the Christian faith and it has been demonstrated that science and Christianity can coexist and enrich each other. The final fifth chapter evaluates McGrath’s approach on the basis of the Faith and Reason encyclical. McGrath’s approach has been proven surprisingly in accordance with the Catholic principles on the relationship between faith and reason. McGrath and John Paul II share the following common points: both authors discuss the problem of logical positivism; reason is only relatively autonomous and needs the assistance of revelation; both authors seek a common ground with their addressees; instead of relying on proofs they emphasize the significance of traces and signs; they both share a dialogue approach; they both stress the significance of personal testimony; as a primary source they use the Word of God and the teachings of the Church Fathers in addition to philosophy; they both believe that any rationality is embedded in tradition and that tradition is not static, but changeable; they both criticize erroneous philosophical systems; they both defend metaphysics and philosophical pluralism and are convinced that ethics is a constituent part of the discussion on faith and reason. In the conclusion of the dissertation, the criteria are presented on the basis of which the rationality of Christianity can be defended. By demonstrating that on the basis of McGrath’s contribution to the dialogue between science and religion answers can be provided to the principal problems that Christianity faces in the modern society, this dissertation contributes to the development of Christian apologetics.

Keywords:McGrath, dialogue, science, critical realism, logical positivism, postpositivism, natural theology, apologetics, Faith and Reason

Similar documents

Similar works from RUL:
Similar works from other Slovenian collections:

Comments

Leave comment

You have to log in to leave a comment.

Comments (0)
0 - 0 / 0
 
There are no comments!

Back