40 of 43 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
The Philosophies Behind the Science, April 5, 2005
This review is from: The Soul of Science: Christian Faith and Natural Philosophy (Turning Point Christian Worldview Series) (Paperback)
Most of the books I read, I read because I delight in them and think I'll enjoy them. There are other books I read merely because I think they will contain some information that will be useful to me in life or in ministry. Then there are some books which are flat out difficult for me to read. Yet I read them to stretch myself and broaden my horizons.
Such is the book The Soul of Science by Nancy Pearcey and Charles Thaxton. It's not the book is any way deficient, as can be seen by the endorsements of the book. Phillip E. Johnson says this is a "brilliant book that deserves a wide readership." J. P. Moreland says it would be an excellent text for courses on science and religion. James W. Sire says that "this book should destroy for all time the persistent myth that Science and Christianity have always been at war with each other."
Truly, this is a great book, but it was difficult for me to read, being a non-scientist. And when I say that I am a non-scientist I am giving myself far too much praise and credit as a scientific scholar. I have always done poorly in science. I somehow survived all of the biology classes I had to take in High School and College and nearly bombed out in chemistry. The fact that I passed a required chemistry class in college, I attribute to either the generosity of the professor or that he was in a drunken stupor when he was handing out grades. I went to college hoping to be an engineer but abandoned all hope of such a career when I took my first physics class. The only time in my life I can ever remember having a complete mental block in a subject was when I took that physics class - I just couldn't get it. Two weeks into the semester I dropped the class and changed my major.
So, I read this book as a non-scientist and want to share a few thoughts on its value to non-scientists like me. For a good review from a technical standpoint you'll have to look elsewhere. The book has lots of interesting information about biology, mathematics, quantum mechanics and DNA, to which the most intelligent response I can give is "wow . . . hey, . . . that's um . . . interesting, . . . that's really groovy man." In other words, it all sounds pretty neat but I don't understand much of what I read.
What I did understand though, and what makes this book valuable to a scientific ignoramus like me is that all science has an underlying philosophy. Science is supposed to be one field of study where you just deal with bare facts, where the facts speak for themselves, where empiricism rules the day. Yet, the project of science itself depends on certain philosophical underpinnings.
The project of science begins with a presupposition that the world around us is real and understandable. This is not something native to all societies and Pearcey and Thaxton point out what many historians agree on - that Christianity is the native soil out of which the scientific enterprise grew. The Christian worldview says that there is a God, a God of order, who created a world of order. Thus the earliest scientists sought to understand the world that God created, to think His thoughts after Him. Science was a means of knowing God and giving praise to Him.
Thus, the notion that there is some kind of hostility between science and Christianity is false. The hostility that arose between science and Christianity arose as scientists abandoned Christian presuppositions for atheistic presuppositions.
However, it is not as if there is a "Christian philosophy of science" and an "atheist philosophy of science." Pearcey and Thaxton demonstrate that, historically, there have been three dominant philosophies of science. All three have morphed at times, but the basic philosophies are Aristotelian, Neo-Platonic and Mechanistic.
Aristotle pictured the world as a vast organism. He believed that all forms of motion or change are accomplished because of an objects built in purpose or goal. Aristotle described things using metaphors of living organisms, not machines. Aristotelianism was rationalistic, viewing God as a rational mind whose thoughts are known by logical analysis. The development of living organisms was driven by some kind of internal pattern that assured they fulfilled their goal or purpose.
The Neo-Platonists were similar to Aristotelians in that they believed the world was a living organism. However, they differed in that how they explained this: "In explaining natural processes, it appealed not to rational Forms but to the creative power of spiritual forces. These forces were often regarded as divine, or at least as avenues of divine activity in the world.
The mechanistic worldview rejected Aristotelianism and Neo-Platonism in that it didn't see the world as a living organism, rather as a machine with God as the chief engineer.
Pearcey and Thaxton point out that there are many nuances within these basic worldviews and the worldviews are applied somewhat differently in different disciplines. Further, these are rough groupings and some scientists would be hard to categorize. But, for Pearcey and Thaxton, these worldviews are portrayed as the grid through which almost all scientific disciplines are pursued. They also point out that, historically, each of these worldviews have been used in service to both Christianity and non-Christianity. Hence, the obvious implication is that there are certain faith commitments that form an even deeper sub-strata beneath the philosophies themselves.
I say that I didn't understand most of the more technical stuff in the book, but there were some nuggets that got through my thick skull. There is a fascinating chapter on the fall of mathematics from its pinnacle as the ultimate source of empirical certainty. And the chapter on DNA is wonderful. The complexity and volume of information contained in DNA gives wonderful testimony to the existence of a creator and to the notion that we are fearfully and wonderfully made.
But the bottom line value of the book is that it will help us look beyond the facts in discussions about Christianity and Science. Very often, Christian apologists seek to go head to head with non-Christian scientists in regards to evidences. The Christian piles up a stack of evidence that he says proves the existence of God or the Christian worldview, and the non-Christian piles up a similar stack of evidence against him. They both attack the others stacks of evidences and defend their own. The outcome sometimes looks like an office where both stacks of paper have been blown around the room resulting in chaos.
We need to look beyond the "bare facts" (there is no such thing as a "bare" fact) to the philosophical foundations behind them. In that regard, the Christian worldview provides a remarkable foundation for science.
"The Soul of Science" affirms the words of Max Planck who says "Over the entrance to the gates of the temple of science are written the words: 'Ye must have faith.'"
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
