A defense of partisan-science: an assessment of Stenmark's non-partisan science3
In his influential book “How to Relate Science and Religion,” Mikael Stenmark argues for the legitimateness of what he calls “partisan science”: “science that is aligned with or supports a particular ideology, religion, or worldview over another.” However, he maintains that we should make an excepti...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic/Print Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Published: |
2015
|
| In: |
Theology and science
Year: 2015, Volume: 13, Issue: 1, Pages: 79-88 |
| IxTheo Classification: | CF Christianity and Science |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (doi) |
| Summary: | In his influential book “How to Relate Science and Religion,” Mikael Stenmark argues for the legitimateness of what he calls “partisan science”: “science that is aligned with or supports a particular ideology, religion, or worldview over another.” However, he maintains that we should make an exception: the justification phase of science (phase 3) requires neutral science. Thus, he argues for “non-partisan science3.” In this article, I assess his arguments for non-partisan science3. I find them wanting and I will argue for partisan science3 and maintain that we should adhere to “Augustinian” or “theistic science.” |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1474-6700 |
| Contains: | In: Theology and science
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1080/14746700.2014.987996 |