Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 5

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Second Thoughts on Naturalistic Theism and Model of Levels of Analysis: A Response to Mark Harris

100%
Bylica P.
Filozoficzne Aspekty Genezy
|
2016
|
vol. 13
275-285
EN
I shall show that Dr. Harris’ study of biblical scholarship is treated in a very serious manner in my paper, as it is the element identifying him as a representative of naturalistic theism (NT). NT is a position that has been recognized in the literature on science and religion for several years. Dr. Harris’ commitment to the rule of methodological naturalism in the natural sciences, as well as his lack of evidence for the limits of using it in his hermeneutical analysis of divine action, makes his academic papers represent the main assumptions of NT. Model of levels of analysis (MLA) helps to show the empirical character of accounts of divine action as an important part of the traditional theistic interpretation of this action, and scepticism towards such an interpretation as a main characteristic of all advocates of NT.
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Naturalistic theism on general divine action within the framework of the levels of analysis model

100%
Bylica P.
Studia Philosophiae Christianae
|
2016
|
vol. 52
|
issue 4
7-37
EN
The model of levels of analysis (MLA) is used to describe naturalistic theism and compare statements describing divine action accepted within traditional Christian theism and naturalistic theism. The empirical/non-empirical character of the statements is the main criterion behind the division of the statements within the model. Naturalistic theism is divided into strong and weak, with the former being analyzed in more detail. Strong naturalistic theism is characterized as trying to avoid the conflict with science by only accepting statements describing general divine action in nature. Such statements belong to the metaphysical levels of analysis.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Mark Harris as a Naturalistic Theist: The Perspective of the Model of Levels of Analysis

100%
Bylica P.
Filozoficzne Aspekty Genezy
|
2015
|
vol. 12
7-36
EN
Presently, naturalistic theism is the dominant position in the debate on the relation between science and religion, defending a thesis that the conflict between science and religion is only an apparent one. Also, this version of theism accepts the naturalist assumptions behind contemporary science and attempts to reformulate the beliefs held within the traditional Christian theism in order to present the religious view of reality as not conflicting with the scientific picture of the world. Certain assumptions behind Mark Harris’s views on the relations between science and religion can be described as consistent with naturalistic theism. The model of levels of analysis helps to analyze the most important themes found within naturalistic theism and show how these are described in the works of Harris. The model facilitates the identification of the relations between particular kinds of assumptions behind the position taken from the point of view of naturalistic theism in the debate on the relation between science and religion. The list of most frequently recurring assumptions — that are also important in Harris’s writings — include: the general division of epistemic competence, which assumes theology (religion) to be competent in dealing with the metaphysical issues (Levels 1 and 2) and science to be the only one competent to deliver the empirical statements describing processes and entities found within the empirical sphere (Levels 4 and 5); the acceptance of the naturalistic assumptions behind contemporary science (Level 2) and skepticism toward the religious notions found in the traditional Christian theism describing supernatural interventions and toward the dualist interpretation of human soul (Level 3). This leads to the acceptance of purely scientific, naturalistic, explanations of the events found within the empirical sphere and to skepticism toward the literal meaning of descriptions of empirical events (Level 5) that are not consistent with the anti-interventionist assumptions behind science. Harris’s acceptance of naturalistic theism in terms of the relation between science and religion and his use of the techniques found in the modern biblical scholarship have led him to the ideas of plurality of meanings and the lack of one definite truth with respect to the specific issues he deals with. From the point of view of MLA it is the rejection of super-naturalistic assumptions of the traditional Christian theism and the acceptance of the naturalistic assumptions of science that seems to be the cause of lack of definite truth in his theological explanations.
4
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Naturalistic theism on special divine action within the framework of the model of the levels of analysis

100%
Bylica P.
Studia Philosophiae Christianae
|
2017
|
vol. 53
|
issue 1
5-33
EN
The model of the levels of analysis (MLA) is used to present a form of naturalistic theism where certain statements on special divine action (SDA) in nature are accepted. The SDA statements found within naturalistic theism ‘hide’ God’s action in certain aspects of nature or actions beyond the reach of scientific endeavors in order to avoid interventionism. From the perspective of the MLA, the essence of intervention is its empirical recognizability, rather than a particular causal joint or the violation of the laws of nature. Rejection of interventions in the above sense means substantial reinterpretation of Christian theism.
5
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Dyskusja nad artykułem Adama Trybusa, „Program badawczy SETI a teoria inteligentnego projektu”

45%
Bylica P., Gazda M., Jodkowski K., Kilian K. J., Sagan D.
Filozoficzne Aspekty Genezy
|
2016
|
vol. 13
211-242
PL
Niniejszy tekst stanowi zapis dyskusji nad artykułem Adama Trybusa, „Program badawczy SETI a teoria inteligentnego projektu”, przeprowadzonej przez pracowników i doktorantkę Instytutu Filozofii Uniwersytetu Zielonogórskiego w ramach spotkań Zielonogórskiej Grupy Lokalnej „Nauka a Religia”. Autor artykułu uznaje, że praktyka porównywania teorii inteligentnego projektu z programem badawczym SETI w celu wykazania naukowego charakteru tej pierwszej jest bezpodstawna. W dyskusji jej uczestnicy wskazują na błędy popełnione przez autora, jak również polemizują z wygłaszanymi w jej trakcie poglądami.
EN
This text is a record of the discussion on the paper “Program badawczy SETI a teoria inteligentnego projektu” [The SETI Research Programme and the Theory of Intelligent Design] by Adam Trybus on a seminar of the Zielona Góra Local Group “Science and Religion” held at the Institute of Philosophy, the University of Zielona Góra. The author argues that comparing the theory of intelligent design and the SETI research programme does not form a valid argument for the scientific character of the former. During the discussion, its participants indicate errors and omissions of the presented paper and discuss various issues related to the described subject area.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.