Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T22:41:30.176Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Science and Religion at the Turn of the Millennium

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 July 2017

Jonathan R. Bryan
Jonathan R. Bryan*
Affiliation:
Earth Sciences, Okaloosa-Walton Community College, 100 College Blvd., Niceville, FL 32578-1294, [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

The categories of conflict, independence, dialogue, and integration have been used to organize the wealth of opinion on the relationship of science and religion (Barbour, 1997). This approach is especially useful in college or high school science courses, or special seminars, because it allows the instructor to locate his or her own opinion, and challenge students to determine their own beliefs. This effectively lays most opinions “on the table” for display in a free market of ideas. Using this approach, students can examine the strengths and shortcomings of major opinions, and it has the advantage of preserving the dignity of all religious views that reside in the science classroom, without compromising any science. The wealth and depth of new ideas that have been forthcoming from both science and theology offer the exciting promise of future wisdom that can serve both religion and science.

Type
Introduction
Information
The Paleontological Society Papers , Volume 5: The Evolution-Creation Controversy II: Perspectives on Science, Religion, and Geological Education , October 1999 , pp. 1 - 15
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 by The Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

Barbour, I.G. 1966. Issues in Religion and Science. Prentice-Hall, Inc., 470 p.Google Scholar
Barbour, I.G. 1974. Myths, Models and Paradigms–A Comparative Study in Science and Religion. Harper & Row, Publishers, San Francisco, 198 p.Google Scholar
Barbour, I.G. 1990. Religion in an Age of Science–The Gifford Lectures, Volume One. Harper, San Francisco, 297 p.Google Scholar
Barbour, I.G. 1993. Ethics in an Age of Technology–The Gifford Lectures, Volume Two.Google Scholar
Barbour, I.G. Religion and Science–Historical and Contemporary Issues. Harper, San Francisco, 368 p.Google Scholar
Barr, J. 1993. Biblical Faith and Natural Theology. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 244 p.Google Scholar
Barrow, J.D., and Tipler, F.J. 1986. The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. Oxford University Press, New York, 706 p.Google Scholar
Begley, S. 1998. Science Finds God. Newsweek, July 20 issue.Google Scholar
Bube, R.H. 1995. Putting it All Together: Seven Patterns for Relating Science and the Christian Faith. University Press of America, 213 p.Google Scholar
Clarke, W.N. Sj. 1988. Is natural theology still possible today? In: Russel, R.J., et al., (eds.) Physics, Philosophy, and Theology: A Common Quest for Understanding, The Vatican Observatory, and University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Clayton, P. 1997. God and Contemporary Science. Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 274 p.Google Scholar
Dennett, D.C. 1995. Darwin's Dangerous Idea. Evolution and the Meaning of Life. Simon and Schuster, New York. 586 p.Google Scholar
Dodson, P. 1997. God and the Dinosaurs. American Paleontologist 5:6–8.Google Scholar
Dorit, R. 1997. Review of Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution. American Scientist 85(5).Google Scholar
Easterbrook, G. 1997. Science and God: A Warming Trend? Science 277:890–893.Google Scholar
Gilkey, L. 1993. Nature, Reality, and the Sacred: The Nexus of Science and Religion. Fortress Press, Minneapolis., 266p.Google Scholar
Goodenough, U. 1998. The Sacred Depths of Nature. Oxford University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Gould, S.J. 1985. Mind and Supermind, In, Gould, S.J., The Flamingo's Smile, WW. Norton & Co., Inc., p. 392–402.Google Scholar
Gould, S.J. 1995. A Task for Paleobiology at the threshold of majority. Paleobiology 21(1):1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, S.J. 1999. Rocks of Ages–Science and Religion in the Fullness of Life. The Library of Contemporary Thought. Ballantine Publishing Group, New York, 241 p.Google Scholar
Gregersen, N.H., and Van Huyssteen, J.W. 1998. Rethinking Theology and Science—Six Models for the Current Dialogue. William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 240 p.Google Scholar
Haught, J. 1998. Science and Religion: From Conflict to Conversation. Paulist Press, Mahwah, NJ, 225 p.Google Scholar
Kayzer, W. 1997. ‘A Glorious Accident’–Understanding Our Place in the Cosmic Puzzle. W.H. Freeman & Company, New York, 306 p.Google Scholar
Larson, E.J., and Witham, L., 1997. Scientists are still keeping the faith. Nature 386:435–436.Google Scholar
Larson, E.J., and Witham, L., 1999. Scientists and Religion in America. Scientific American 281 (3):88–93.Google Scholar
Miller, J.B. 1998. An Evolving Dialogue: Scientific, Historical, Philosophical and Theological Perspectives on Evolution. American Association for the Advancement of Science.Google Scholar
Monod, J. 1972. Chance and Necessity. Vintage Books, New York, 180 p.Google Scholar
Murphy, N. 1997. Reconciling Theology and Science: A Radical Reformation Perspective. Pandora Press.Google Scholar
NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, 1999. Science and Creationism, Second Edition. National Academy Press, p. ix.Google Scholar
Peacocke, A. 1993. Theology for a Scientific Age. Fortess Press, Minneapolis, 438 p.Google Scholar
Pennock, R.T., 1999. Tower of Babel The Evidence against the New Creationism. MIT Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, T. 1996. Theology and Science: Where Are We? Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science 31:323–343.Google Scholar
Peters, T. (ed.), 1998. Science & Theology: The New Consonance. Westview Press.Google Scholar
Polkinghorne, J. 1988. Science and Creation–The Search for Understanding. New Science Library, Boston, 113 p.Google Scholar
Polkinghorne, J. 1994. The Faith of a Physicist. Princeton University Press, 211 p.Google Scholar
Polkinghorne, J. 1998. Belief in God in an Age of Science. Yale University Press, New Haven, 133 p.Google Scholar
Polyani, M. 1958. Personal Knowledge–Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. University of Chicago Press, 428 p.Google Scholar
Raymo, C. 1998. Skeptics and True Believers–The Exhilarating Connection Between Science and Religion. Walker, New York, 300 p.Google Scholar
Richards, W.J. 1997. Many worlds hypotheses: A naturalistic alternative to deism. Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 49:218–227.Google Scholar
Richardson, W.M. and Wildman, W.J., (eds.). 1996. Religion and Science: History, Method, Dialogue. Routledge, 450 p.Google Scholar
Scott, E. 1998. Creationism and Evolution: Still Crazy After All These Years. GSA Today, January, p. 16–18.Google Scholar
Smith, J. 1992. Prospects for Natural Theology. The Monist 75:406–420.Google Scholar
Van Huyssteen, J.W. 1998. Duet or Duel? Theology and Science in a Postmodern World. Trinity Press International. Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, 182 p.Google Scholar
Walker, K.R. (ed.). 1984. The Evolution-Creation Controversy: Perspectives on Religion, Philosophy, Science and Education. Paleontological Society Special Publication 1, 155 p.Google Scholar