Religion in an Age of Science (Gifford Lectures 1989-1991, Vol 1) [Paperback]

Ian G. Barbour (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: April 1990 | Series: Gifford Lectures 1989-1991, Vol 1 (Book 1)

A comprehensive examination of the major issues between science and religion in today's world.

Editorial Reviews

From the Publisher

A comprehensive examination of the major issues between science and religion in today's world.

About the Author

Ian G. Barbour has retired from Carleton College where he was professor of physics, professor of religion, and Bean Professor of Science, Technology, and Society. The "preeminent synthetic in the field" (Cross Currents,) he is the author of several influential books, including Ethics in an Age of Technology and Myths Models, and Paradigms, which was nominated for the National Book Award. He gave the world-renowned Gifford Lectures, 1989-1991.

Product Details

• Paperback: 297 pages
• Publisher: Harpercollins (Short Disc); 1st edition (April 1990)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0060603836
• ISBN-13: 978-0060603830
• Product Dimensions: 9 x 6.1 x 1 inches
• Shipping Weight: 14.4 ounces
• Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (5 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #2,066,904 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

7 of 7 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Review Continued, July 10, 1998

By A Customer

This review is from: Religion in an Age of Science (Gifford Lectures 1989-1991, Vol 1) (Paperback)

Part Three: Part three of this book is devoted to philosophical and theological reflections concerning human nature. (189) In discussing human nature, Barbour appreciates the evolutionary theory purported by contemporary biologists. He suggests that "in an evolutionary perspective we may view both the human and divine activity in Christ as a continuation of the intensification of what happened previously."(211) In light of this perspective, the goals for the future should include work toward justice, peace, environmental preservation, and empowering persons to understand that their participation in society is meaningful.

At the outset of the book, Barbour revealed his appreciation for process thought as an aid for integrating religion and science. Chapter eight is devoted to a more detailed account of why he holds this appreciation. He begins the chapter by asserting that the twentieth-century view of nature is very different from the medieval or Newtonian views. It is evolutionary and includes a complex combination of law and chance. The twentieth century views nature as interdependent, holistic, multi-leveled, and community based.

Process philosophy has a systematic metaphysics which most closely resembles the twentieth- century scientific view of nature. Whitehead saw his work as an attempt to construct "a system of ideas which bring aesthetic, moral and religious interests into relation with those concepts of the world which have their origin in natural science."(Process and Reality, vi) Barbour notes several elements which Whitehead emphasized: 1. The primacy of becoming over being; 2. The interconnection of events; 3. Reality as organism; 4. A measure of self-creative freedom for each entity. Barbour claims that in Whitehead's metaphysical system, causality for the entity is partly efficient, partly self-creative, and partly final. Each entity is the product of past causes, divine purposes, and the entity's own activity.

The diverse levels of experienc! e described by Whitehead allow for a description of experiences ranging from the least complex (e.g., an electron) to the most complex (e.g., a person or culture). Each type of individual in this diverse spectrum enjoys subjective experience, a notion David Griffin describes as a doctrine of panexperientialism. The author notes that process thought is opposed to dualism and claims that both mental and physical poles exist in all entities.

Barbour questions whether Whitehead's analysis adequately expresses the character of individuals at both extremes of complexity. He believes Whiteheadian categories are inadequate to express the continuing identity of the human self at the upper end. Secondly, the self-determination and novelty enjoyed by the inanimate world at the lower end of the range seem postulated by Whitehead only for the sake of metaphysical consistency. The author believes that a Whiteheadian system could be modified to correct these weaknesses without endangering its coherence.(227)

Continuing his analysis of process metaphysics in relation to nature, Barbour finds many features of contemporary science with which process metaphysics is congenial. However, he notes that the concept of purpose is difficult for scientists to accept. He reconciles part of the dilemma by noting (inaccurately I believe) that process thought maintains that the behavior of inanimate objects can be explained entirely by efficient causation. (It seems to me more accurate to place the word "almost" prior to "entirely" in this sentence).

In opening his discussion of process theology, Barbour notes that God acts as the primordial ground of order and the ground of novelty. In addition, the process God is influenced by events in the world. Barbour mentions again the notion of a dipolar God as advocated by Charles Hartshorne. In this conception, God does not retain all power and thus works persuasively as a participator in creation. God "is not before all creation but with all creation! ," Whitehead asserts. (Process and Reality, 521) In sum, Barbour professes that the Whiteheadian understanding of God is consistent with what we know about biological and human history.(234)

The categories of process thought are also helpful in discussing Christian theology. In particular, categories are available to develop the central Christian notion that "God is love." God's action in nature, in religious experience, and in Jesus Christ can be addressed using a common set of concepts offered by process theology. Process thought illumines the discussion of Christian categories of revelation, prayer, sin, immanence, personal responsibility, etc. Finally, Barbour identifies the contribution process thought makes in discussing the problem of evil.

To begin the final chapter entitled "God and Nature," Barbour discusses the various models of God's role in nature. In his discussion of the monarchical model, he identifies six problem areas: 1. accounting for human freedom; 2. offering a viable theodicy; 3. patriarchal limitations; 4. inclination toward religious intolerance; 5. present evolutionary worldview; 6. the existence of both law and chance in nature.

Following his discussion of the monarchial model, Barbour outlines the advantages and disadvantages of other models including the neo-Thomisitic, the self-limiting God, existentialist, linguistic analysis, and the world as God's body. Barbour summarizes what he feels is the process model concerning the God and nature relationship: a community with one member preeminent but not controlling. He labels the model "interpersonal social."(260) Returning to the six problems of the monarchical model, Barbour shows the adequacy of the model offered in process thought.

The author is aware of various criticisms of process and attempts to answer three. First, he acknowledges that the worshiping community may feel restricted by the dominance of metaphysical language in process thought. However, these limitation! s are inherent in almost any metaphysical scheme. He also acknowledges that the transcendent-immanent God of process thought is limited in power, but believes that conceiving God as limited is a conception that is warranted. Finally, he asserts that the process model, though departing from the classical model, adequately fulfills basic criteria: agreement with the data, coherence, scope and fertility. Barbour believes that the process model has fewer weaknesses than any of the other models he considers and is the most adequate in our attempt to speak responsibly about religion in an age of science.

Short Evaluation: This book reads like an encyclopedia of relevant theological and philosophical convictions in regards to the attempts to reconcile religion and science. The book is also written in a style that makes reading it enjoyable. After reading in the first chapter that Barbour would use process theology cautiously, I was surprised to find him so wholeheartedly appropriating process categories and ideas near the end of the book. Unfortunately, I felt like he was cramming too much in too small of a chapter. He could have fleshed out more of the implications of what a process attempt to integrate science and religion would look like. In addition, I could not agree with Barbour that Whitehead's system was inadequate to account for entities at both ends of the complexity scale. The strength of Whitehead's metaphysic, for me, is that it does offer an adequate means to talk about entities of varying complexity. All things considered, this was an excellent read!

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars A must read, but it sacrifices much for the sake of a comprehensive metaphysic, March 10, 2006

By 

Benjamin D. Amundgaard (Kalispell, MT USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Religion in an Age of Science (Gifford Lectures 1989-1991, Vol 1) (Paperback)

Dr. Barbour is no doubt a brilliant man and a giant in the domain of science and religion. This book is a must read simply because Barbour is mentioned in almost every other book dealing with the topic. He puts forward some very helpful ideas for understanding and relating science and religion, however there are two flaws in his work, one serious and one close to fatal. The serious flaw is the complexity of the book. There are some extremely difficult concepts to wrap one's head around much less apply in any fruitful way. The near fatal flaw in Dr. Barbour's book is that, while he considers himself a Christian, it can hardly be considered so. He rejects a real, space-time fall; original sin; the incarnation (as is traditionally understood); substitutionary atonement; the imago dei (again, as is traditionally understood); the resurrection of Christ; and has serious reservations concerning an afterlife. Moreover, he advocates process theism rejecting God's omnipotence and many other fundamental charachteristics of God's character and nature. If Barbour is allowed to reject all that and still refer to himself as a Christian, one wonders what the difference is between a Christian and anyone else. Liberal Protestants might not have a problem with Barbour, but if you're looking for orthodoxy, you certainly won't find it here.

1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Wonderful overview of complex issues, November 8, 1998

By A Customer

This review is from: Religion in an Age of Science (Gifford Lectures 1989-1991, Vol 1) (Paperback)

Barbour does a wonderful job in this book of explaining in layman's terms complex issues in both the fields of religion and science. He explores the overlap and conflict between different theories in each field and shows how the whole "religion versus science" issue is too simplified a summary of two such diverse fields. Barbour comes across as highly knowledgeable in both fields and not at all judgemental. A very good, informative read.