共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 46 毫秒
1.
The conflict between science and religion: a discussion on the possibilities for settlement 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
In his article Skepticism, truth as coherence, and construtivist epistemology: grounds for resolving the discord between science and religion?, John Staver identifies what he considers to be the source of the conflicts between science and religion: the establishment of the relationship between truth and knowledge, from the perspective of those who see a correspondence between reality and knowledge, assumed in the realm of both contending fields. In the present work, although agreeing with the general principles of constructivism, I discuss Staver’s option of viewing truth as coherence and his proposal of renouncing the objective of knowing reality from both fields’ perspective. Three aspects of Staver’s article are commented and discussed here: the one referring to views of reality or of nature as shared by scientists; the one concerning the different forms of religious beliefs among scientists; and the one accounting for the impossibility, from the standpoint of constructivism, of determining limits to the objectives of science and religion. Also emphasized in this discussion is the importance of combining theoretical and methodological approaches in tune with the complexity of the theme under discussion, accounting for the need to preserve the freedom of thinking and of doing research. 相似文献
2.
Ed Lehner 《Cultural Studies of Science Education》2010,5(1):71-78
John R. Staver’s article calling for a constructivist epistemology to maneuver between the disparate ways of knowing between science and religion prompts this response. This paper acknowledges Staver’s scholarly analysis of the issue. Scientific and religious conflicts do present prominent challenges because these are profound but often-monolithic ways of constructing knowledge. However, my response withholds fully embracing Staver’s call for a constructivist epistemology chiefly because his work goes beyond the confines of constructivism. Conversely, Staver’s call for constructivist epistemology does not go far enough to advance a resolution between science and religion. Why? Because both science and religion often employ hyper-rationality in understanding the world, a process that does little to clarify the world’s complexities. Philosophically, I refrain from accepting a complete schism between the two because such a framing does little to heal a conflict between those who praise the seen and those who praise the unseen. My response explores how hyper-rationality has triumphed over both science and religion, leaving the believer in one, or both, to navigate the journey alone. This article calls for the return of the natural philosopher. Utilizing this nineteenth-century term for scientist, this paper calls for an inquirer, one who can rise above the ideologies of science and religion to observe the current concerns of each field anew. Finally, taking a cue from Staver, this response introduces a potential discourse between science and religion in ways that each may, without embracing a variant ideology, make space for dialogue and mutual respect. 相似文献
3.
Nidhal Guessoum 《Cultural Studies of Science Education》2010,5(1):55-69
This article consists of two parts. The first one is to a large extent a commentary on John R. Staver’s “Skepticism, truth as coherence, and constructivist epistemology: grounds for resolving the discord between science and religion?” The second part is a related overview of Islam’s philosophy of knowledge and, to a certain degree, science. In responding to Staver’s thesis, I rely strongly on my scientific education and habit of mind; I also partly found my views on my Islamic background, though I enlarge my scope to consider western philosophical perspectives as well. I differ with Staver in his definition of the nature, scope, and goals of religion (concisely, “explaining the world and how it works”), and I think this is the crux of the matter in attempting to resolve the perceived “discord” between science and religion. The heart of the problem is in the definition of the domains of action of science and religion, and I address this issue at some length, both generically and using Islamic principles, which are found to be very widely applicable. The concept of “reality,” so important to Staver’s thesis, is also critically reviewed. The philosophy of knowledge (and of science) in Islam is briefly reviewed in the aim of showing the great potential for harmony between the two “institutions” (religion and science), on the basis of the following philosophy: science describes nature, whereas religion gives us not only a philosophy of existence but also an interpretative cloak for the discoveries of science and for the meaning of the cosmos and nature. I conclude by insisting that though science and religion can be considered as two worldviews that propose to describe “reality” and to explain our existence and that of the world; they may come to compete for humans’ minds and appear to enter into a conflicting position, but only if and when we confuse their domains and modes of action. 相似文献
4.
John R. Staver 《Cultural Studies of Science Education》2010,5(1):19-39
Science and religion exhibit multiple relationships as ways of knowing. These connections have been characterized as cousinly,
mutually respectful, non-overlapping, competitive, proximate-ultimate, dominant-subordinate, and opposing-conflicting. Some
of these ties create stress, and tension between science and religion represents a significant chapter in humans’ cultural
heritage before and since the Enlightenment. Truth, knowledge, and their relation are central to science and religion as ways
of knowing, as social institutions, and to their interaction. In religion, truth is revealed through God’s word. In science,
truth is sought after via empirical methods. Discord can be viewed as a competition for social legitimization between two
social institutions whose goals are explaining the world and how it works. Under this view, the root of the discord is truth
as correspondence. In this concept of truth, knowledge corresponds to the facts of reality, and conflict is inevitable for
many because humans want to ask which one—science or religion—gets the facts correct. But, the root paradox, also known as
the problem of the criterion, suggests that seeking to know nature as it is represents a fruitless endeavor. The discord can
be set on new ground and resolved by taking a moderately skeptical line of thought, one which employs truth as coherence and
a moderate form of constructivist epistemology. Quantum mechanics and evolution as scientific theories and scientific research
on human consciousness and vision provide support for this line of argument. Within a constructivist perspective, scientists
would relinquish only the pursuit of knowing reality as it is. Scientists would retain everything else. Believers who hold
that religion explains reality would come to understand that God never revealed His truth of nature; rather, He revealed His
truth in how we are to conduct our lives. 相似文献
5.
Bhaskar Upadhyay 《Cultural Studies of Science Education》2010,5(1):41-46
There have been debates about the place of religion in science and in what ways knowledge that is produced through religion
can aid in the learning and teaching of science. The discord between science and religion is mainly focused on whose knowledge
is better in describing and explaining the reality. Constructivist epistemology seems to give some scholars hope in the possibility
that the discord between science and religion can be ameliorated and that their expressions of reality can co-exist. In this
forum contribution I present some Hindu perspectives to re-interpret how science and Hinduism explain reality. I have used
only few Hindu perspectives based on selected Hindu writings, particularly Vedanta, to expand on objectivity and reality.
Finally, I recommend that social constructivism may be a better framework in keeping science and religion discord at bay. 相似文献
6.
刘益宇 《温州职业技术学院学报》2006,6(4):53-55
著名科学社会学家约翰·齐曼认为,当代科学正在从学院时代走向后学院时代,他既反对朴素的科学知识真理论,也不赞同知识社会学的建构主义立场,提倡一种“关于科学的自然主义的解释”。齐曼承认科学的实在性,但同时也强调建构性对科学的作用,他以一种融合辨证的观点描述了现实的科学。 相似文献
7.
Clarence W. Joldersma 《Educational theory》2011,61(3):275-293
In this essay Clarence Joldersma explores radical constructivism through the work of its most well‐known advocate, Ernst von Glasersfeld, who combines a sophisticated philosophical discussion of knowledge and truth with educational practices. Joldersma uses Joseph Rouse's work in philosophy of science to criticize the antirealism inherent in radical constructivism, emphasizing that Rouse's Heideggerian critique differs from the standard realist defense of modernist epistemology. Next, Joldersma develops an alternative conception of truth, in terms of disclosure, based on Lambert Zuidervaart's work in aesthetics. Joldersma concludes by arguing that this notion of truth avoids the pitfalls of both realism and antirealism, giving educational theorists a way forward to accept some of the major insights of constructivism with respect to learning and teaching without having to relinquish a robust notion of truth. 相似文献
8.
There is an old argument in philosophy that attempts to undermine any realist account of truth and thus knowledge in science and elsewhere. This is the claim that we can never compare either our experiences of, or our beliefs about, reality with how reality is because, in order to check whether our experiences or beliefs correspond with reality, always further experiences or beliefs must intervene. Thus we can never have direct knowledge, or more strongly any knowledge at all, of how reality is. Constructivists take this to heart and look for accounts of knowledge that are anti-realist and coherentist and/or constructivist in which the role of the external world in knowledge claims is thoroughly downplayed or non-existent. This argument is a central tenet of constructivism both with respect to scientific knowledge and learning. The argument, though widespread, is not without serious difficulties that leave the realist position untouched. 相似文献
9.
Brian E. Woolnough 《Science & Education》1996,5(2):175-183
In this response the logical positivist approach of the authors is challenged, as is their propagation of the myth of an historical, endemic conflict between science and religion. The authors' one dimensional approach to the world is shown to produce a limited world view, eliminating so much of human experience, of art, beauty, and music as well as religion. In contrast an awareness of different types of knowledge, with different criteria for truth, enables a fuller perspective in which science and religion, and art and music and human values, are all compatible. In conclusion, some ways in which Science Education and Religious Education can be taught to their mutual benefit are indicated. 相似文献
10.
“What is truth?” Pontius Pilot asked Jesus of Nazareth. For many educators today this question seems quaintly passé. Rejection of “truth” goes hand-in-hand with the rejection of epistemological realism. Educational thought over the last decade has instead been dominated by empiricist, anti-realist, instrumentalist epistemologies of two types: first by psychological constructivism and later by social constructivism. Social constructivism subsequently has been pressed to its logical conclusion in the form of relativistic multiculturalism. Proponents of both psychological constructivism and social constructivism value knowledge for its utility and eschew as irrelevant speculation any notion that knowledge is actually about reality. The arguments are largely grounded in the discourse of science and science education where science is “western” science; neither universal nor about what is really real. The authors defended the notion of science as universal in a previous article. The present purpose is to offer a commonsense argument in defense of critical realism as an epistemology and the epistemically distinguished position of science (rather than privileged) within a framework of epistemological pluralism. The paper begins with a brief cultural survey of events during the thirty-year period from 1960–1990 that brought many educators to break with epistemological realism and concludes with comments on the pedagogical importance of realism. Understanding the cultural milieu of the past forty years is critical to understanding why traditional philosophical attacks on social constructivist ideas have proved impotent defenders of scientific realism. 相似文献
11.
Lisa J. Starr 《Cultural Studies of Science Education》2010,5(1):191-200
In this paper I discuss the tension created by religion and science in one student’s understanding of knowledge and truth by exploring two questions: “How do individuals accommodate their religious beliefs with their understanding of science?” and “How does religious knowledge interact with scientific knowledge to construct meaning?” A constructivist framework sheds light on the answers to both questions in the context of process and product. 相似文献
12.
Stefaan Blancke Johan De Smedt Helen De Cruz Maarten Boudry Johan Braeckman 《Science & Education》2012,21(8):1167-1184
This paper discusses the relationship between religion and science education in the light of the cognitive sciences. We challenge the popular view that science and religion are compatible, a view that suggests that learning and understanding evolutionary theory has no effect on students?? religious beliefs and vice versa. We develop a cognitive perspective on how students manage to reconcile evolutionary theory with their religious beliefs. We underwrite the claim developed by cognitive scientists and anthropologists that religion is natural because it taps into people??s intuitive understanding of the natural world which is constrained by essentialist, teleological and intentional biases. After contrasting the naturalness of religion with the unnaturalness of science, we discuss the difficulties cognitive and developmental scientists have identified in learning and accepting evolutionary theory. We indicate how religious beliefs impede students?? understanding and acceptance of evolutionary theory. We explore a number of options available to students for reconciling an informed understanding of evolutionary theory with their religious beliefs. To conclude, we discuss the implications of our account for science and biology teachers. 相似文献
13.
Hugh Lacey 《Science & Education》1996,5(2):143-153
This article proposes an alternative way of looking at religion to that proposed by Mahner and Bunge, and challenges a claim they make about a presupposition of science. From the alternative perspective there are constructive tensions rather than incompatibilities between science and religion. The article concludes with a proposed set of criteria to be used in critical reflections on faiths, religious or secular. It suggests that education would be enhanced by introducing students to the reflections and dialogues where these criteria are applicable. 相似文献
14.
This paper contributes to the debate on constructivist learning theory. We contrast the constructivist notion of activity that identifies 'active' with 'conscious' and 'intentional' with John Dewey's habitual conception of action, knowing and learning by doing. As regards language and truth, we defend an anti-representationalist conception that sees words as tools of communication and coordination rather than representations reflecting reality. To compare our Deweyan pragmatist conception of learning with contemporary viewpoints associated with constructivism, we examine and criticise the notions of 'knowledge building' and 'metacognition'. Finally, we consider what Deweyan ideas about learning and growth might mean for education in the twenty-first century. 相似文献
15.
16.
This article discusses how to deal with the relations between different cultural perspectives in classrooms, based on a proposal for considering understanding and knowledge as goals of science education, inspired by Dewey’s naturalistic humanism. It thus combines educational and philosophical interests. In educational terms, our concerns relate to how science teachers position themselves in multicultural classrooms. In philosophical terms, we are interested in discussing the relations between belief, understanding, and knowledge under the light of Dewey’s philosophy. We present a synthesis of Dewey’s theory of inquiry through his naturalistic humanism and discuss its implications for the concepts of belief, understanding, and knowledge, as well as for the goals of science teaching. In particular, we highlight problems arising in the context of possible conflicts between scientific and religious claims in the school environment that result from totalitarian positions. We characterize an individual’s position as totalitarian if he or she takes some way of thinking as the only one capable of expressing the truth about all that exists in the world, lacks open-mindedness to understand different interpretative perspectives, and attempts to impose her or his interpretation about the facts to others by violent means or not. From this stance, any other perspective is taken to be false a priori and, accordingly, as a putative target to be suppressed or adapted to the privileged way of thinking. We argue, instead, for a more fallibilist evaluation of our own beliefs and a more respectful appraisal of the diversity of students’ beliefs by both students and teachers. 相似文献
17.
The attitude towards Christianity of 624 form six students in Kenya was measured using the Francis scale of attitude towards Christianity Form ASC4B. Indices were developed to measure the view that science attains to absolute truth, the perception of Christianity as necessarily involving creationism, and personal religious behaviour. Sex, academic achievement, study of religion in form six, study of a science subject in form six, parental educational level and parental church attendance were taken into account in the analysis of the data by path analysis. No significant relationship was found between attitude towards Christianity and perception of Christianity as necessarily involving creationism, but the view of science as attaining to absolute truth does have a negative influence on attitude towards Christianity. The significant influences of students’ sex, mother's educational level and father's church attendance on attitude towards Christianity are all mediated through religious behaviour. 相似文献
18.
梦是一个虚幻而又真实的世界,是特殊状态下的思维与情绪活动。人类对梦的研究和探索,同时涉及宗教、神学、哲学、自然科学和人文社会科学等许多问题。随着人们对梦研究的进一步加深,形成了不同的梦的理论,比如弗洛伊德、荣格、阿德勒、弗洛姆、巴甫洛夫等对梦都形成了自己独特的理论。而对于梦的功能也提出了许多不同的观点。人类对于梦的探索,反映了人类自身的理性精神和对真理孜孜不倦的追求。 相似文献
19.
吴力群 《泉州师范学院学报》2014,(1):21-27
根据泉州宗教信仰的生存、发展状况以及内外各种关系的复杂性、整体性,从宗教生态的角度探索泉州宗教信仰的结构、泉州宗教信仰与政治、经济、文化的关系,以及各种宗教信仰之间的关系,力求为进一步研究泉州宗教信仰的特点,探索泉州成为世界宗教博物馆的原因,提供新的思路。 相似文献
20.
Theodore Brelsford 《Religious education (Chicago, Ill.)》2013,108(3):264-278
This article proposes a concept of “mythical realism” as a way of understanding important characteristics of religion and orienting religious education. The focus is on beliefs as one central aspect of religion. The author draws on recent cognitive studies in religion to illumine the “counterintuitive” and “mythic” character of religious belief, while also arguing that religious thinking should be and commonly is held together with “intuitive,” “scientific” understandings of experiential reality. A case is made for the enhancement of “mythical realist” religious understanding as a fundamental goal of religious education. Pedagogical suggestions are given for nurturing such mythical realist faith. 相似文献