-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
Behalf Of Keith B Miller
Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 3:24 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: Science and religion: two ways of knowing
I think that Shuan's summary of the nature of science is expressed well.
It is very close to how I present the issue.
Thanks Keith
One possible way that this
"two ways of knowing" approach can be misunderstood, is that they can be
seen as being Hermetically sealed off from each other. This can end up as
Gould's "Non-overlapping Magisteria" idea.
Frankly, I was worried about this. I think that Gould had the admirable
goal of trying to reconcile religion and science, but many people seem
unhappy with the compromise that he struck
But just because science and
theology (I prefer the term theology to religion) have distinct ways of
knowing does not mean that they cannot or do not influence each other.
I agree with you that they do and should influence each other, although I am
a bit unclear on how they should
Below is something a put together dealing with the nature of science. I
think you will see a lot of common points with Shuan's post.
(Snip great stuff)
BTW, keith, is it true that you are working on a book on the whole
science-religion thing? If you are , how's it coming?
Keith
Keith B. Miller
Department of Geology
Kansas State University
Manhattan, KS 66506
kbmill@ksu.edu
http://www-personal.ksu.edu/~kbmill/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 01 2002 - 18:08:47 EST