| The question of the relation of science and religion/theology is a centuries-old question which recognizes the impact of science on religion and theology. The focus of this study is Langdon Gilkey's response to this question. It examines his multi-level argument for a relation of mutuality between science and religion/theology.; The starting point is Gilkey's history of the question and his criticisms of liberal and neo-orthodox Protestant and pre-Vatican II Catholic responses to it. Gilkey's evaluation of theological responses is continued in Chapter Two with his critiques of the "empirical theology" of Bernard Lonergan and of Process theologians.; The third chapter delineates Gilkey's analysis of scientific inquiry. On the basis of the philosophical analyses of Stephen E. Toulmin, Thomas Kuhn and Michael Polanyi, Gilkey critiques positivistic models for science and argues that scientific inquiry cannot be abstracted from the cultural context of scientists. He uncovers religious elements in scientific inquiry and concludes that science has a religious dimension.; Chapter Four addresses the dependence of theology on science in the question of the cognitive status of theological discourse. Gilkey's response is a proposal for a theological method guided by criteria for meaning and truth. Included are his conceptions of the dialectical relationship of rationality and credibility in theology, and of "the grammar of assent" to theological truth.; Chapter Five examines Gilkey's analysis of our science-dominated culture in a "theology of culture," which is based on the claim of Paul Tillich, that religion is the substance of culture. Gilkey's theology of culture includes a critical evaluation of the role given to science in our cultures's myths, ideologies and values.; The final chapter assesses Gilkey's argument for mutuality by raising questions of consistency and of underdeveloped aspects of his thought. A judgment is made that Gilkey's contribution lies in his ability to take seriously our scientific culture in a response which overcomes dualism and conflict, notes the weaknesses of concordism, and argues for a relation of true mutual dependence between science and religion/theology. |
