Today there are two very different views concerning the relation of science and religion. On the one hand is the view that there is no limit to the competency of science, including its ability to subsume the traditional domains of religion and values. On the other hand is the view that science ought to itself be shaped in a significant way by religion. In this book these opposing views are presented, critically discussed, and replaced with a badly needed conciliatory model of science and religion.
Written by Templeton Prize-winner Mikael Stenmark, How to Relate Science and Religion points an exciting way forward in the effort to reconcile what are arguably the two most powerful cultural forces of our time. Stenmark succinctly lays out the central issues of the debate and shows what is at stake for the nature and advancement of human knowledge. The outcome of Stenmark's work is the construction of a "multidimensional model" of science and religion that refuses to automatically prioritize either. Stenmark shows the ongoing though shifting value of both science and religion played out as a dynamic, evolving relationship.
Stenmark updates Barbour's classic text "Religion and Science" in ways that integrate diverse perspectives regarding philosophy of religion and philosophy of science. Having also read some of Stenmark's papers regarding logical claims in relation to the personhood of God in light of evolutionary theory, I can see the careful and analytical processes at work looking at not only different levels of how one understands science, but even at what level ideology/religion might have a positive (or negative) impact on the scientific endeavor.
He gives his own opinion at the end of the book but shows that simply having a "four fold" classification scheme is simply not the best way to look at the interplay of the two areas of thought. In the end he takes seriously the human side of science, how this affects current scientific investigation, and where it shouldn't be affected by ANY ideology/religion. This book should challenge even modern claims of Scientism regarding the nature of science as demonstrable knowledge, necessary evidence for belief, and the nature of finite time/resources by the individual in the larger world.