A Biologist's Perspective on the Future of the Science‐religion Dialogue in the Twenty‐first Century

Abstract

In recent issues of Zygon, numerous reflections have been published commenting on where the field of science-and-religion has been, where it presently stands, and where it should move in the future. These reflections touch on the importance of the dialogue and raise questions as to what audience the dialogue addresses and whom it should address. Some scholars see the dialogue as prospering, while others point out that much work needs to be done to make the dialogue more accessible to a larger audience and more successful at tackling the provocative questions before us. Other academics view the questions themselves as needing further consideration and focus before answers to them can even be explored. In this article I provide a general overview of these essays by outlining some general categories of thought that seem to emerge from the contributors. I then present some of my own opinions concerning the future of the science-religion field and emphasize that the dialogue, in addition to its traditional roles, must further the philosophical framework that can aid humanity in resolving the most pressing global concerns of our time. 218 Zygon OVERVIEW OF RECENT ZYGON ESSAYSIt is my pleasure to provide a brief summary of the many essays that have been published in recent issues of Zygon on "the future of the sciencereligion dialogue." It is an equal joy to write a few reflections of my own.Having acted as a scientist in the biomedical research area and as a contributor and witness to the science-religion field since my research days at Harvard Medical School and the Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, I feel truly honored to have been given this opportunity. I have not engaged the science-religion dialogue for as long as many of the scholars who have written on the topic at hand in this journal, but I hope to do justice in this overview and also to be provocative in my comments on the future direction of the field.Indeed, the authors are well versed in the science-religion dialogue and span many exciting disciplines: Philip Hefner (systematic theology), K.

Scholars, Amateurs, and Artists as Partners for the Future of Religion and Science

“…As the case studies below show, partnerships between scholars of religion and science and amateurs and artists will push the “field” to include more fully the lived questions of our partners in addition to abstract, conceptual, or analytical ones. Here, we draw upon the work of Wesley J. Wildman and John J. Carvalho, IV, who have advocated an applied, problem‐solving approach to science and religion (Carvalho , 220–21; Wildman ), or better yet, a constellation of methods, rather than a strict field with a neatly delineated subject of inquiry. We find the move to problems over canonical content an important step.…”