Full Article Title
A Lakatos philosophy of science fosters nuanced precision within critical realism, recognizing that falsification of any theory (for example, evolution) does not occur without providing a better theory.
Imre Lakatos articulated a moderate foundational rational model of derivation in the philosophy of mathematics and science that utilized Peircian pragmatism to encourage its productivity and to make sense of paradigm change. Lakatos proposes a sophisticated falsification view that encourages helpful development, because, “There is no falsification before the emergence of a better theory.” Thus a creationist model needs to focus on crafting better theories or creationist models will never be seriously considered by the academy as a live option. Lakatos’ approach encourages a progressive orientation current with the latest warranted findings rather than clinging to a tradition. Justification for the theologian comes from exegesis and grounded philosophizing that contribute to a more nuanced understanding of an issue. The justification for the scientist comes from tested peer reviewed proposals that contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the issue.
Critical realism is better understood as Lakatos proposed than in Kuhn’s paradigm shift. In creationism, the Kuhnian radical shift in paradigms would: (a) encourage the creationist to give up because he lost the battle as the scientific world shifted from creationism to evolutionism or (b) seek naive falsification of the evolutionary theory. Whereas, a Lakatos theorist would recognize that a more nuanced model between the extremes might better reflect the data in creationism. So a better model than a Kuhnian paradigm shift would be a Lakatos’ approach illustrated by the contemporary rivalry among relativistic and quantum theories. A critical realist approach values recognizing the precise differences of these varied approaches, and crafting a nuanced method that reflects this sensitivity.
Examination will include the following methodological approaches to theology and science: Alister McGrath’s Bhaskerian approach, Nancey Murphy’s post-modern Lakatos’ approach, and my moderate foundational Lakatos’ approach.
Life Sciences | Physical Sciences and Mathematics | Religion
Scientific method, Theological method, Imre Lakatos, Critical realism
DigitalCommons@Cedarville provides a publication platform for fully open access journals, which means that all articles are available on the Internet to all users immediately upon publication. However, the opinions and sentiments expressed by the authors of articles published in our journals do not necessarily indicate the endorsement or reflect the views of DigitalCommons@Cedarville, the Centennial Library, or Cedarville University and its employees. The authors are solely responsible for the content of their work. Please address questions to firstname.lastname@example.org.
"A Nuanced Lakatos Philosophy of Theology and Science,"
Proceedings of the International Conference on Creationism: Vol. 6
, Article 6.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.cedarville.edu/icc_proceedings/vol6/iss1/6
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.