View by:







Alternatives to a Realist Position

One alternative to a realist position (see critical realism in science and religion) is the claim made by what is referred to as the ‘strong programme’ of the sociology of science - that science is simply a social construction, rather than an attempt to describe a real world. Such a claim appears to suffer from major defects. For one thing it runs counter to what almost all practising scientists think they are doing. Its main problem, however, is that of reflexivity. If it were the case, then no human analysis could be more than a social construction, so the social scientists who made this claim would have to face up to the implication that their analyses and conclusions suffered from the same problem of being socially constructed. These analyses would not be saying anything true about how the world is or about what scientists are actually doing, but only reflecting the results of the sociologists’ own social conditioning.To reject the validity of a thorough-going relativism is not however to decry the importance of social and political factors in determining the course of science, not least in determining what research...

The most profound challenge to critical realism in science comes from views coming under headings such as ‘instrumentalism’ or ‘constructivism’. These focus on the impossibility, already mentioned, of detaching data from the instrumental and experimental design which produced it. Given that we can neither think nor speak nor engage with the world at all except through language, theory, and concept, there can be no way to step beyond our theoretical frameworks and assess directly how adequate any particular theory is to the complexity of reality. It should be noted moreover that science undergoes major periods of change in which old theories are discarded and radically new ones adopted. Consequently many philosophers of science have argued that it is better to make no realist claims at all, but merely to regard scientific data as, however successfully, a function of the instrumentation, and of the conceptual constructs, by which science functions. In the language of the metaphor of the maps, this view would hold that our map gets us about on the particular contrived journey that is science (just as a map of the London Underground gets us around the city) but we have no real idea what the streets are like which surround our path.

The major problems, then, for realists, even followers of critical realism, are the theory-ladenness of data, the underdetermination of theory by experiment, and in particular scientific revolutions in which supposed points of reference to reality have to be discarded because a radically new ‘paradigm’ takes over within a science.See God, Humanity and the Cosmos pp72-74 on ‘paradigm shift’.

The major problem for instrumentalists is the sheer success and apparent progressiveness of science. Its maps seem to work, in general, astonishingly well. It is hard to credit that an electron is an instrumental fiction, even though no-one has ever seen one directly, since so many phenomena have been observed in accordance with the behaviour and properties of electrons.

To follow this debate in more detail see in particular Laudan (1977)Laudan, Larry, Progress and its Problems (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1977)and Banner (1990).Banner, Michael, The Justification of Science and the Rationality of Religious Belief (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990)

Particularly important to critical realism is the concept of inference to the best explanation. Granted that we cannot be sure that data correspond in any simple way to reality, we can nevertheless consider a variety of explanations of the data, and elicit the one that best fits our criteria of comprehensiveness, consistency, and compactness. (See judging the fit between data and reality). For a recent defence of inference to the best explanation see Clayton (1997).Clayton, Philip, ‘Inference to the best explanation’, Zygon 32, (3) 377-91 (1997)

We can understand more about the similarities and differences between claims to realism in science and in theology by looking at the role played by model and metaphor in these two rationalities. Click on the role of model and metaphor to explore this.

Or investigate applying critical realism to theology.

Email link | Feedback | Contributed by: Dr. Christopher Southgate
Source: God, Humanity and the Cosmos  (T&T Clark, 1999)

Topic Sets Available

AAAS Report on Stem-Cells

AstroTheology: Religious Reflections on Extraterrestrial Life Forms

Agency: Human, Robotic and Divine
Becoming Human: Brain, Mind, Emergence
Big Bang Cosmology and Theology (GHC)
Cosmic Questions CD-ROM Preview...
Cosmic Questions Interviews

Cosmos and Creator
Creativity, Spirituality and Computing Technologies
CTNS Content Home
Darwin: A Friend to Religion?
Demystifying Information Technology
Divine Action (GHC)
Dreams and Dreaming: Neuroscientific and Religious Visions'
E. Coli at the No Free Lunchroom
Engaging Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence: An Adventure in Astro-Ethics
Evangelical Atheism: a response to Richard Dawkins
Ecology and Christian Theology
Evolution: What Should We Teach Our Children in Our Schools?
Evolution and Providence
Evolution and Creation Survey
Evolution and Theology (GHC)
Evolution, Creation, and Semiotics

The Expelled Controversy
Faith and Reason: An Introduction
Faith in the Future: Religion, Aging, and Healthcare in the 21st Century

Francisco Ayala on Evolution

From Christian Passions to Scientific Emotions
Genetic Engineering and Food

Genetics and Ethics
Genetic Technologies - the Radical Revision of Human Existence and the Natural World

Genomics, Nanotechnology and Robotics
Getting Mind out of Meat
God and Creation: Jewish, Christian, and Muslim Perspectives on Big Bang Cosmology
God, Humanity and the Cosmos: A Textbook in Science and Religion
God the Spirit - and Natural Science
Historical Examples of the Science and Religion Debate (GHC)
History of Creationism
Intelligent Design Coming Clean

Issues for the Millennium: Cloning and Genetic Technologies
Jean Vanier of L'Arche
Nano-Technology and Nano-ethics
Natural Science and Christian Theology - A Select Bibliography
Neuroscience and the Soul
Outlines of the Science and Religion Debate (GHC)

Perspectives on Evolution

Physics and Theology
Quantum Mechanics and Theology (GHC)
Questions that Shape Our Future
Reductionism (GHC)
Reintroducing Teleology Into Science
Science and Suffering

Scientific Perspectives on Divine Action (CTNS/Vatican Series)

Space Exploration and Positive Stewardship

Stem-Cell Debate: Ethical Questions
Stem-Cell Ethics: A Theological Brief

Stem-Cell Questions
Theistic Evolution: A Christian Alternative to Atheism, Creationism, and Intelligent Design...
Theology and Science: Current Issues and Future Directions
Unscientific America: How science illiteracy threatens our future
Will ET End Religion?

Current Stats: topics: >2600, links: >300,000, video: 200 hours.