02.05.09
Edge religion/science debate
On Jerry Coyne’s “DOES THE EMPIRICAL NATURE OF SCIENCE CONTRADICT THE REVELATORY NATURE OF FAITH?”
There is something about science/religion debates that make one throw up one’s hands in disgust/despair.
The conventional combination in evidence in Dawkins and his followers is completely disconbobulating to those who have often been critical of Christianity, or even religion in general. These, we should note, are two different issues, and the issue of faith is a third. Christians have abused the question of faith, and scientists have confused the issue of scientism with science, or at least general enquiry into reality questions. We are confronted by two false extremes monopolizing the debate. It seems like every attempt to resolve the confusion is doomed to fail, because all the perspectives are too limited, or undermined from the start. The fallacies of Darwinism, for example, instantly confuse the position of scientists addressing religion.
And the metaphysical pre-Kantianism of the religionists leave them mired in metaphysical presumption.
I think the philosopher Kant remains a resource here for both sides to extricate themseles from their respective quagmires.