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.
|
