The possibility of a theology-engaged science : a response to Perry and Ritchie
MetadataShow full item record
This article provides a response to John Perry and Sarah Lane Ritchie's article, “Magnets Magic, and Other Anomalies: In Defense of Methodological Naturalism.” In so doing, it provides a defense of some of the arguments I made in my article, “Should a Christian Adopt Methodological Naturalism?” I begin by addressing some of the confusion about my position. However, it is not simply my intention to address confusions. There remain some fundamental differences between my position and Perry and Ritchie's. It is on these differences that I wish to focus––differences that enable me to maintain my critique of methodological naturalism without falling prey to the problems they raise. Constructively, I advance the argument that the Christian scientist should be open to the possibility of theology‐engaged science, as well as the science‐engaged theology that Perry and Ritchie advocate.
Torrance , A B 2018 , ' The possibility of a theology-engaged science : a response to Perry and Ritchie ' , Zygon , vol. 53 , no. 4 , pp. 1094-1105 . https://doi.org/10.1111/zygo.12475
© 2018 by the Joint Publication Board of Zygon. This work has been made available online in accordance with the publisher’s policies. This is the author created accepted version manuscript following peer review and as such may differ slightly from the final published version. The final published version of this work is available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/zygo.12475
Items in the St Andrews Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.