TAKING THEOLOGY AND SCIENCE SERIOUSLY WITHOUT CATEGORY MISTAKES: A RESPONSE TO IAN BARBOUR

. In my response to Ian Barbour's criticisms, I first argue for the anthropological dimensions and contextuality of any theology. Next I examine and criticize Barbour's thesis that I am an in‐compatibilist about divine action. Finally I illustrate the fact that I see genuine opportunities...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:	Zygon 2008-03, Vol.43 (1), p.271-276
1. Verfasser:	Smedes, Taede A.
Format:	Artikel
Sprache:	eng
Schlagworte:	Anthropology Barbour, Ian compatibil-ism divine action evolutionary explanations of religion General points History of science and technology History of science in relation to other disciplinary fields Ian Barbour Justin Barrett Paul Bloom primary and secondary causality Religion Science Theology
Online-Zugang:	Volltext
Tags:	Tag hinzufügen Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!

Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:	. In my response to Ian Barbour's criticisms, I first argue for the anthropological dimensions and contextuality of any theology. Next I examine and criticize Barbour's thesis that I am an in‐compatibilist about divine action. Finally I illustrate the fact that I see genuine opportunities for a dialogue between theologians and scientists without apologetics, category mistakes, or relegating theology to the fringes of science, by pointing to evolutionary explanations of religion.
ISSN:	0591-2385 1467-9744
DOI:	10.1111/j.1467-9744.2008.00912.x