Abstract
Whether science can reach conclusions with substantial worldview import, such as whether supernatural beings exist or the universe is purposeful, is a significant but unsettled aspect of science. For instance, various scientists, philosophers, and educators have explored the implications of science for a theistic worldview, with opinions spanning the spectrum from positive to neutral to negative. To delineate a mainstream perspective on science, seven key characterizations or “pillars” of science are adopted from position papers from the world’s largest scientific organization, the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Based on those pillars and an examination of scientific method, I argue that the presuppositions and reasoning of science can and should be worldview independent, but empirical and public evidence from the sciences and humanities can support conclusions that are worldview distinctive. I also critique several problematic perspectives: asserting that science can say nothing about worldviews and the opposite extreme of insisting that science decisively supports one particular worldview; weakening science so severely that it lacks truth claims; and burdening science with unnecessary presuppositions. Worldview-distinctive conclusions based on empirical evidence are suitable for individual convictions and public discussions, but not for institutional endorsements and scientific literacy requirements.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science). (1989) Science for All Americans. AAAS, Washington, DC
AAAS. (1990) The Liberal Art of Science. AAAS, Washington, DC
Anscombe G.E.M., Wright G.H. (1969) Ludwig Wittgenstein’s on Certainty. Harper & Row, New York
Audi R. (eds) (1999) The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Bering J.M. (2006) The Cognitive Psychology of Belief in the Supernatural. American Scientist 94:142–149
Blackburn S. (eds) (2005) The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Broad W.J. (1979) Paul Feyerabend: Science and the Anarchist. Science 206:534–537
Brown, G.E.: 1993, The Objectivity Crisis: Rethinking the Role of Science in Society, Chairman’s report to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, House of Representatives, 103rd Congress, first session, serial D, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC
Callender C. (2004) Measures, Explanations and the Past: Should “Special” Initial Conditions be Explained? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55:195–217
Cobern W.W. (2000) The Nature of Science and the Role of Knowledge and Belief. Science & Education 9:219–246
Cobern W.W., Loving C.C. (2001) ‘Defining “Science” in a Multicultural World: Implications for Science Education. Science & Education 85:50–67
Collins F.S. (2006) The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief. Free Press, New York
Conway Morris S. (2003) Life’s Solution: Inevitable Humans in a Lonely Universe. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Craig E. (eds) (1998) Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Routledge, New York
Craig W.L. (1992) The Origin and Creation of the Universe: A Reply to Adolf Grünbaum. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 43:233–240
Davson-Galle, P.: 2006, ‘Why Compulsory Science Education Should Not Include Philosophy of Science’, Science & Education 15, (in press)
Dawkins R. (2003) A Devil’s Chaplain: Reflections on Hope, Lies, Science, and Love, Houghton Mifflin, Boston
Dennett D.C. (2006) Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon. Viking, New York
Earman J. (2000) Hume’s Abject Failure: The Argument Against Miracles. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Easterbrook G. (1997) Science and God: A Warming Trend?. Science 277: 890–893
Gauch, H.G.: 2002, Scientific Method in Practice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; Chinese edition 2004, Tsinghua University Press, Beijing
Gauch, H.G.: 2006, ‘Winning the Accuracy Game’, American Scientist 94, 133–141; correspondence 2006, 94, 196; addendum 2006, 94, 382
Gauch H.G., Bloom J.A., Newman R.C. (2002) Public Theology and Scientific Method: Formulating Reasons That Count Across Worldviews. Philosophia Christi 4: 45–88
Gauld C.F. (2005) Habits of Mind, Scholarship and Decision Making in Science and Religion. Science & Education 14:291–308
Gruender D. (2001) A New Principle of Demarcation: A Modest Proposal for Science and Science Education. Science & Education 10: 85–95
Grünbaum A. (2000) A New Critique of Theological Interpretations of Physical Cosmology. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55: 1–43
Grünbaum A. (2004) The Poverty of Theistic Cosmology. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55:561–614
Grünbaum A. (2005) Rejoinder to Richard Swinburne’s “Second Reply to Grünbaum”. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56:927–938
Hansson, L. & Redfors, A.: 2006a, ‘Physics and the Possibility of a Religious View of the Universe: Swedish Upper Secondary Students’ Views’, Science & Education 15, (in press)
Hansson, L. & Redfors, A.: 2006b, ‘Upper Secondary Students in Group Discussions About Physics and our Presuppositions of the World’, Science & Education, 15, (in press)
Hofmann J.R., Weber B.H. (2003) The Fact of Evolution: Implications for Science Education. Science & Education 12:729–760
Holder, R.D.: 1998, ‘Hume on Miracles: Bayesian Interpretation, Multiple Testimony, and the Existence of God’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49, 49–65
Horgan, J.: 1991, ‘Profile: Thomas S. Kuhn, Reluctant Revolutionary’, Scientific American 264(5), 40, 49
Horgan J. (1992) Profile: Karl R. Popper, The Intellectual Warrior. Scientific American 267(5):38–44
Horgan J. (1993) Profile: Paul Karl Feyerabend, The Worst Enemy of Science. Scientific American 268(5):36–37
Horgan J. (2005) Clash in Cambridge: Science and Religion Seem as Antagonistic as Ever. Scientific American 293(3):24B–28
Houston J. (1994) Reported Miracles: A Critique of Hume. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Irzik G., Irzik S. (2002) Which Multiculturalism?. Science & Education 11:393–403
Johnson G. (2006) Scientists on Religion: Theist and Materialist Ponder the Place of Humanity in the Universe. Scientific American 295(4):94–95
Keeports D., Morier D. (1994) Teaching the Scientific Method: Assessing a Seminar on Science and Pseudoscience at Oakland’s Mills College. Journal of College Science Teaching 24:45–50
Keranto T. (2001) The Perceived Credibility of Scientific Claims, Paranormal Phenomena, and Miracles among Primary Teacher Students: A Comparative Study. Science & Education 10:493–511
Koertge N. (eds) (1998) A House Built on Sand: Exposing Postmodernist Myths about Science. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Kuhn T.S. (1970) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Second Edition. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Lacey H. (1996) On Relations between Science and Religion. Science & Education 5:143–153
Larson E.J., Witham L. (1999) Scientists and Religion in America. Scientific American 281(3):88–93
Lindberg D.C., Numbers R.L. (eds) (2003) When Science & Christianity Meet. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Machamer P. (1998) Philosophy of Science: An Overview for Educators. Science & Education 7:1–11
Mahner M., Bunge M. (1996a) Is Religious Education Compatible with Science Education?. Science & Education 5:101–123
Mahner M., Bunge M. (1996b) The Incompatibility of Science and Religion Sustained: A Reply to Our Critics. Science & Education 5:189–199
Martin M. (1997) Is Christian Education Compatible with Science Education?. Science & Education 6:239–249
Matthews M.R. (1994) Science Teaching: The Role of History and Philosophy of Science. Routledge, New York
Matthews M.R. (1996) Editorial. Science & Education 5:91–99
Matthews M.R. (2000) Time for Science Education: How Teaching the History and Philosophy of Pendulum Motion can Contribute to Science Literacy. Kluwer Academic, New York
Matthews M.R. (2004) Review of Scientific Method in Practice by Hugh G. Gauch, Jr. Science & Education 13:251–252
McComas W.F. (eds) (1998) The Nature of Science in Science Education: Rationales and Strategies, Kluwer, New York
Monton B. (2006) God, Fine-Tuning, and the Problem of Old Evidence. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57:405–424
Nash L.K. (1963) The Nature of the Natural Sciences. Little, Brown, and Company, Boston
Nola R. (2003) Naked before Reality; Skinless before the Absolute: A Critique of the Inaccessibility of Reality Argument in Constructivism. Science & Education 12:131–166
NRC (National Research Council). (1996) National Science Education Standards. National Academy Press, Washington, DC
NRC (National Research Council) (1999) Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science. Mathematics Engineering and Technology National Academy Press, Washington, DC
O’Hear A. (1989) An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. Oxford University Press, Oxford
O’Hear A. (1993) Science and Religion. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 44:505–516
Palmer H. (1985) Presupposition and Transcendental Inference. St. Martin’s Press, New York
Pennock R.T. (2002) Should Creationism be Taught in the Public Schools?. Science & Education 11:111–133
Polanyi M. (1962) Personal Knowledge. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Poole M. (1996) ... For More and Better Religious Education. Science & Education 5:165–174
Popper K.R. (1968) The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Harper & Row, New York
Schupbach J.N. (2005) On a Bayesian Analysis of the Virtue of Unification. Philosophy of Science 72:594–607
Settle T. (1996) Applying Scientific Openmindedness to Religion and Science Education. Science & Education 5:125–141
Sherburn R. (2004) Review of Scientific Method in Practice by Hugh G. Gauch, Jr. Journal of Biological Education 38(2):98
Shogenji T. (2003) A Condition for Transitivity in Probabilistic Support. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 54:613–616
Smith M.U., Siegel H., McInerney J.D. (1995) Foundational Issues in Evolution Education. Science & Education 4:23–46
Southerland S.A. (2000) Epistemic Universalism and the Shortcomings of Curricular Multicultural Science Education. Science & Education 9:289–307
Sterelny K. (2006) Memes Revisited. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57:145–165
Swinburne R. (2000) Reply to Grünbaum. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 51:481–485
Swinburne R. (2005) Second Reply to Grünbaum. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56:919–925
Theocharis, T. & Psimopoulos, M.: 1987, ‘Where Science has Gone Wrong’, Nature 329, 595–598; correspondence 1987, 330, 308, 689–690, 1988, 331, 129–130, 204, 384, 558; reply 1988, 333, 389
Trigg R. (1993) Rationality and Science: Can Science Explain Everything?. Blackwell, Oxford
Trigg R. (1998) Rationality and Religion: Does Faith Need Reason?. Blackwell, Oxford
Trigg R. (2002) Philosophy Matters: An Introduction to Philosophy. Blackwell, Oxford
Turner H. (1996) Religion: Impediment or Savior of Science?. Science & Education 5:155–164
Weisberg J. (2005) Firing Squads and Fine-Tuning: Sober on the Design Argument. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56: 809–821
Woolnough B.E. (1996) On the Fruitful Compatibility of Religious Education and Science. Science & Education 5:175–183
Wren-Lewis J. (1996) On Babies and Bathwater: A Non-Ideological Alternative to the Mahner/Bunge Proposals for Relating Science and Religion in Education. Science & Education 5:185–188
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
I appreciate helpful comments on earlier versions of this paper from William Cobern, Simon Conway Morris, Peter Davson-Galle, Gurol Irzik, Michael Matthews, Robert Nola, Roger Trigg, and three anonymous reviewers.
Rights and permissions
This article is published under an open access license. Please check the 'Copyright Information' section either on this page or in the PDF for details of this license and what re-use is permitted. If your intended use exceeds what is permitted by the license or if you are unable to locate the licence and re-use information, please contact the Rights and Permissions team.
About this article
Cite this article
Gauch, H.G. Science, Worldviews, and Education. Sci & Educ 18, 667–695 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-006-9059-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-006-9059-1