History and the Future of Science and Religion

Tirosh‐Samuelson, Hava

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9744.2010.01094.x

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Zygon also faces continuity and change qua audience and focus, as discussed extensively in the June 2010 issue (Hefner 2010;Peters 2010;Schweitz 2010;Tirosh-Samuelson 2010;Pederson 2010;Peterson 2010;Drees 2010;and others). Zygon also has to change in some of its practicalities, so as to continue to function in a changing academic landscape.…”

Section: Change and Continuitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Change and Continuity

Drees¹

2010

Zygon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Change and Continuitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Change and Continuity

Drees¹

2010

Zygon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…From genetic chimeras to armed drones, these moments of intersection appear as both literal and metaphorical monsters. Such complications of modernity have exposed both old and new ways for religion, science, and technology to interact, and have led to consequent increase in public and scholarly engagement (see Tirosh‐Samuelson 2010).…”

Section: Introduction: a Monstrous Perspective On Religion Science mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Hydra‐logical Approach: Acknowledging Complexity in the Study of Religion, Science, and Technology

Geraci¹

2020

Zygon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scholarship has grown increasingly nuanced in its grappling with the intersections of religion, science, and technology but requires a new paradigm. Contemporary approaches to specific technologies reveal a wide variety of perspectives but remain too often committed to typological classification. To be vigilant of our obligation to understand and reveal, scholars in the study of religion, science, and technology can adopt a hydra-logical stance: we can recognize that there are cultural monsters possessing scientific, technological, and religious heads. These heads may work with a common agenda or they might not. They might disagree, pulling their shared body back and forth in a public commotion that lays waste to their surroundings. They might see past one another or move in tandempurposively or not. Evaluations of climate response and AI benefit from seeing how the various heads are inseparable: indeed, cutting one off simply promotes the growth of new heads. Methodological and analytical clarity, therefore, emerges in the transition from schemes of classification to the recognition of hydras.

show abstract

Reflecting Upon Religion

Drees

2010

Zygon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The new editor of Zygon considers the task of "yoking religion and science" not as the combination of two similar entities. Rather, their categorical difference makes reflection on their interplay worthwhile. One thereby confronts the understanding of religion, the multiple facets of religion, the diversity of religious traditions, and disagreements within religious communities. Although concern about secularization might stimulate an apologetic attitude, the author favors a critical and more skeptical attitude, countering superstition and the abuse of people. By being academic rather than apologetic we engage in the best apology for meaningful religion, if any.

show abstract

History and the Future of Science and Religion

Cited by 3 publications

References 17 publications

Change and Continuity

Change and Continuity

A Hydra‐logical Approach: Acknowledging Complexity in the Study of Religion, Science, and Technology

Reflecting Upon Religion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About