Landmarks in the Struggle between Science and Religion. By James Y. Simpson, M.A., D.Sc., F.R.S.E., Professor of Natural Science, New College, Edinburgh. (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1925. Pp. xiii + 288. Price 7s. 6d. net.)

Philosophy ◽  
1926 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 388-389
Author(s):  
A. E. E.
2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 304-320
Author(s):  
Slamet Yahya

Abstract: This research was aimed at explaining the efforts of State College onIslamic Studies (STAIN) of Purwokerto to actualize the reunification of science and religionand the reason why this college implemented such a policy. This is a qualitative researchin which the data were gained through document study, observation, and interview. Thisresearch found that State College on Islamic Studies of Purwokerto actualized thereunification of science and religion through developing its vision and mission into ajargon ‘STAIN Purwokerto is the Center for Science and Religion’, comprising aspectsof epistemology, axiology, and ontology. Meanwhile the efforts to achieve this ambitionare actualized through balancing the distribution of social and natural science, developinglearning process, developing research programs, developing social work, and developingnetworking with national and international institutions.Keywords: reunification, science, religion. Abstrak: Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa dalam upaya paradigmatik STAINdalam mewujudkan reunifikasi sains dan agama adalah dengan mengembangkanVisi dan Misi ke dalam “Jargon STAIN sebagai Arsy Ilmu dan Agama”, baikdari segi epistemologis, aksiologis, maupun ontologisnya. Upaya akademik STAINdalam mewujudkan reunifikasi sains dan agama pertama; menyeimbangkandistribusi ilmu pengetahuan, khususnya antara ilmu-ilmu sosial-keagamaan danhumaniora dengan ilmu-ilmu eksakta, kedua; pengembangan kegiatan pembelajaran,ketiga; pengembangan penelitian, keempat; pengembangan bidangpengabdian masyarakat, dan kelima; pengembangan networking baik denganinstansi dalam maupun luar negeri.Kata kunci; reunifikasi, sains, agama.


Author(s):  
William C. Frederick ◽  
Richard O. Mason ◽  
Ian I. Mitroff ◽  
Nancy B. Kurland ◽  
Diane L. Swanson ◽  
...  

Slovene ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 393-412
Author(s):  
Yevgeniy M. Matveev

The main objective of this paper is to describe the types and functions of biblical and liturgical citation in M. V. Lomonosov’s works. This research into Lomonosov’s text corpus shows that explicit biblical and liturgical citation can be revealed in the texts of different genres—both in his poetry and in his prose works (and not only in “poetic” rhetorical prose). The paper focuses on different forms of biblical and liturgical contexts in Lomonosov’s panegyric odes, natural science texts, working papers, and letters. Three sources of biblical and liturgical parallels were used: the Moscow Bible (1663), the Festal Menaion (1730), and the Octoechos (1715); the latter includes Lomonosov’s notes in the margins. The research shows that Lomonosov proceeds in various ways: he might mention a Bible source without citation; he might use marked citations; and he might include biblical and liturgical citations into his own speech without reinterpretation, sometimes giving them some additional semantics. Biblical and liturgical phraseology can be described as using the following specific forms: a) phrases that actuate biblical and liturgical semantics in Lomonosov’s panegyric odes (an important issue is to reveal which context is relevant—the biblical or the liturgical); b) those that demonstrate logical consistency between science and religion in Lomonosov’s natural science texts; c) those that construct polemic and ironic context in prose works of different genres; and d) those that emphasize some statements in Lomonosov’s letters, creating the effect of “switching the languages.”


Author(s):  
Ernan McMullin

Galileo Galilei, one of the most colourful figures in the long history of the natural sciences, is remembered best today for two quite different sorts of reason. He has often been described as the ’father’ of modern natural science because of his achievements in the fields of mechanics and astronomy, and for what today would be called his philosophy of science, his vision of how the practice of science should be carried on and what a completed piece of natural science should look like. While none of the elements of that philosophy was entirely new, the way in which he combined them was so effective that it did much to shape all that came after in the sciences. In the popular mind, however, as a continuing stream of biographies attest, it is his struggle with Church authority that remains the centre of attention, symbolic as it is of the often troubled, but always intriguing, relationship between science and religion.


1970 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 261-264
Author(s):  
Stanisław Wszołek

This is the second book by Michael Heller which presents to English readers his previously written papers on science and theology. The first one, The New Physics and a New Theology (Vatican Observatory Publications 1996) is worth mentioning in this context because in it, Michael Heller proposes a new direction in theology - the theology of science. The theology of science as envisioned by Heller is defined as an authentic theological reflection on the existence, foundations, methods, and results of modern science. Its purpose is to break down the mutual lack of trust between science and theology and to help theology advance to a new stage, where it can participate creatively in the currents of modern thought. Philosophers of science examine the boundaries of natural science and what can be known by the methods of science alone. Theology extends beyond these boundaries to include the supernatural, although Heller is far from embracing any kind of dualism. His way of extending these boundaries is different. A good example is provided by Einstein's famous question, „Why is the world comprehensible?" Neither Einstein nor any other philosopher or scientist is able to answer this question. It is theology that has to take over and seek the answer to Einstein's question. Heller provides more similar issues.


2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 290-307
Author(s):  
Steven Shapin

This essay situates Weber’s 1917 lecture Science as a Vocation in relevant historical contexts. The first context is thought about the changing nature of the scientific role and its place in institutions of higher education, and attention is drawn to broadly similar sentiments expressed by Thorstein Veblen. The second context is that of scientific naturalism and materialism and related sentiments about the “conflicts” between natural science and religion. Finally, there is the context of Weber’s lecture as a performance played out before a specific academic audience at the University of Munich, and the essay suggests the pertinence of that performance to an appreciation of the lecture’s meaning.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document