Christianity and the Nature of Science: A Philosophical Investigation

Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Dec 2002 by Blout, Douglas K

Christianity and the Nature of Science: A Philosophical Investigation. By J. P. Moreland. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1989, 272 pp., $14.99.

Back in print after an unfortunate hiatus, this book provides an excellent starting point for those interested in thinking Christianly about science. Its author, J. P. Moreland of Biola University's Talbot School of Theology, intends the volume "to assist and encourage Christians to think more clearly about the relationship between science and theology" (p. 12) as well as to "see that science and theology have interacted with each other and should" (p. 13). Such assistance and encouragement come via a defense of three theses: (1) no clear line of demarcation can be drawn between science and nonscience; (2) science faces limits which undermine its claim to be epistemically superior to philosophy and theology; and (3) those attempting to integrate science and theology should not naively assume that science presents a true (or approximately true) account of the natural world. The defense of these theses comprises five chapters. Chapters 12 establish the first thesis, chapter 3 the second, and chapters 4-5 the third. A sixth chapter comprises a discussion of scientific creationism, and a short postscript concludes the discussion.

Chapter 1 argues that neither an adequate definition of science nor a satisfactory account of its necessary and sufficient conditions has been put forward. Moreover, Moreland contends, the task of finding such definitions or conditions is primarily a philosophical one. Since their professional training prepares scientists to do science rather than to study it as a discipline, such tasks go beyond their training. So too does the task of integrating science and theology that-properly understood-turns out also to be philosophical. Of course, the philosophical nature of such tasks does not preclude scientists from engaging in them; but when scientists do engage in them, they do not do so as scientists.

Chapter 2 concerns scientific method, the analysis of which properly falls under the purview of historians and philosophers of science. Rather than a single "scientific method," Moreland argues, there exists a family of methods that defies rigorous characterization. Since some of these methods find use in non-scientific disciplines such as theology, science cannot legitimately claim to be the only rational, truth-seeking discipline. In chapter 3, he argues that scientism-the view that "science is the very paradigm of truth and rationality" and what falls "outside of science is a matter of mere belief and subjective opinion" (p. 104)-is self-refuting. Advocates of scientism fail to take into account various limitations faced by science.

Chapter 4 concerns scientific realism, according to which "successful scientific theories are true or approximately true models of the theory-independent world" (p. 13). Scientific truth claims presuppose certain philosophical commitments (e.g. that there are abstract objects, that sense experience is reliable, that truth is correspondence). Given that the debate between scientific realists and their anti-realist opponents is quite complex and has many adherents on each side, Moreland maintains that one should not dogmatically maintain a realist position. In light of this, he suggests that an eclectic approach, which has one adopt realism or anti-realism on a case-by-case basis, might be the best response to the debate. Of course, no matter how one responds to it, the realist/anti-realist debate has implications for conflict between science and theology, for it shows at the very least that such conflict should not necessarily be resolved in science's favor. In chapter 5, Moreland discusses alternatives to scientific realism, including constructive empiricism, operationalism, phenomenalism, pragmatism, and the eclectic view that he himself favors. Here, he also discusses the implications of Thomas Kuhn's work for the realist/anti-realist debate.

Chapter fi responds to various objections to counting scientific creationism as a science. Finally, a concluding postscript briefly summarizes the six preceding chapters, calls the Christian community to develop a distinctively Christian understanding of science, and offers suggestions to facilitate its doing so (e.g. recovering a Christian understanding of vocation and allocating resources to support Christians engaged in integrating science and theology).

Not only does Moreland provide a well-written and cogently argued introduction to the nature of science, but he also provides a helpful bibliography and extensive footnotes for those who wish to pursue the discussion further. While his overall discussion of science seems well-informed, balanced, and accurate, I found his treatment of the realist/anti-realist debate to be particularly helpful. Of course, this does not mean that I find nothing here with which to disagree. For instance, I differ with Moreland about whether those who adopt his eclectic approach should assume a realist position unless they have reason to do otherwise. He holds that, when assessing a particular scientific theory, one should give the benefit of the doubt to the realist view of it; thus, "the burden of proof is on the antirealist" (p. 205). Both realists and anti-realists agree that a successful scientific theory is instrumentally useful, but the realist-unlike the antirealist-goes on to claim that such a theory is also (approximately) true. Since the realist claims more than the anti-realist, it seems to me that he should bear the burden of proof. But this amounts to little more than a quibble and certainly does not dissuade me from enthusiastically recommending this book to anyone interested in the occasionally stormy relationship between science and theology.