Final Short Answer Flashcards
1a) State your view of divine action (6)
- Personal Interventionism — NO
- Personal Providentialism — NO
- Cosmological Interventionism in Origins — NO
- Cosmological Interventionism in Operations (eg, retrograde planetary motion) — NO
- Cosmological Providentialism in Origins — NO
- Cosmological Providentialism in Operations — NO
1b) Defend your view of divine action (4)
- There are better explanations for what divine action “explains”
- Explaining coincidences using god is a convenient explanation, but does not provide evidence for him
- We explained retrograde planetary motion with science
- Saying god created through evolution is not necessary
2a) State your definition of religion (6)
- Tremmel’s definition of religion (psychological process)
- Elements of Smart’s definition too (must contain some kind of ritual, further must be organized to a degree)
- I do NOT agree with the belief that any metaphysic is a religion (I strongly disagree when people say that being an atheist is some form of religion)
2b) Defend your definition of religion (4)
- Evidence suggesting religion is an evolutionary byproduct (genes or memes)
- In my mind, atheism is as much a religion as abstinence is a sex position or bald is a hair colour
- If someone were to argue that atheism is a religion because they believe that any metaphysic is a religion though, I admit that that is LOGICALLY CONSISTENT
2c) State your personal worldview (1)
Dysteleological atheist
2d) Give your strongest reason for your personal worldview (1)
- There is no evidence for God and no need for him in our explanations of the world
2e) Give your greatest weakness/fear for your personal worldview (1)
- The idea that your dead loved ones are all waiting for you in heaven certainly seems nice, albeit pretty unbelievable
3a) State your definition of science (6)
- Science is physical, empirical, historically conditioned, and makes use of the scientific method
- It leads to metaphysical thinking, but is distinct from it
- Science only accepts as truth what there is evidence for
- Separate from religion
3b) Defend your definition of science (4)
- physical b/c no evidence for anything except the physical world (assumes realism)
- historically conditioned b/c it has changed so much over the centuries (Babylonian science compared to science now)
- Sci and rel separate b/c a main component of religion is faith and belief in phenomenon for which there is no empirical evidence
- Eye witness accounts in the bible are not a legitimate source of evidence
4a) State your model of the relationship between science and religion (8)
- Conflict (H) - yes
- Contrast (H) - no
- Contact (H) - no
- Confirmation (H) - no
- Conflict (B) - yes
- Independence (B) - no
- Dialogue (B) - no
- Integration (B) - no
4b) State your thesis statement (1 sentence only) for your personal view of the relationship between science and religion (1)
- Religion’s requirement for faith in things for which there is no evidence is fundamentally opposed to the empirical values of science.
4c) Defend your personal view of the relationship between science and religion (4)
- 90% of the Royal Society are not religious
- Faith = religion, blind belief in something based on what others have told you is not the scientific method
- argument to be made: we would be a much more scientifically advanced society if religion had not had such political power for so long
- Religious beliefs are often opposed to scientific discoveries — this can lead to bias
5a) State your view of intelligent design (6)
- I do not believe in any form of intelligent design.
- I believe in “nothing but” evolution
- I align with Dawkins
- Draw diagram of dotted line between “engineered character” and “artistic character” (triangle in the middle representing that both are included in the illusion of design
5b) Defend your view of intelligent design (4)
- Authority argument — Dawkins
- God is superfluous in an explanation that works without him
- It’s okay to embrace “We don’t know”
- Just because we don’t seem to be wired to understand Darwinism is not an argument that there must be more
6) Write a letter to a young earth creationist and use Galileo’s views on science and religion in order to assist this person to realize that it is possible to accept both biological evolution and Christian faith (15)
- Galileo was a Christian as well
- He was using what we call hermeneutics
- Message incident principle, accommodation
- Galileo believed that we can use our understanding of the world to better interpret scripture
- “The intention of the Holy Spirit is to teach us how one goes to heaven, and not how heaven goes.”
- Two books model
- They must go hand in hand
- We cannot deny the physical realities of our world — if we believe them to be god’s work, then they must be as true as scripture, and we can reinterpret scripture more easily than the world around us
- “Scripture’s intention is salvation, not science”
7a) List insights from the history of geology and the biblical flood that you find are important for understanding of the relationship between science and religion (3)
- Flood accounts exist all over the world in ancient communities in regions susceptible to flooding
- The sequential order of strata
- Archeological evidence of the Hebrews appearing in the ANE
7b) Defend why the insights in 7a are important to you (3)
- Worldwide flood accounts are not accounts of Noah’s worldwide flood, just due to the common experience of floods around the world
- The layers are never out of sequence, they would be haphazard and random if a worldwide flood had happened
- A small, new tribe among larger communities would likely adopt their legends and reinterpret them