Non-monotonic Logic and the Compatibility of Science and Religion

What makes Indonesian government officials believe in and implement evidence-based policy: The mediating role of religion-science compatibility beliefs

“…This statement argues that the fight between faith and reason is best understood at the societal level instead of the individual [ 3 , 15 ]. In contrast to conflict narratives, which tend to oversimplify the interaction between multiple organizations, individuals' perspectives tend to be more nuanced, and nuanced individuals tend to have more nuanced perspectives [ 1 , 4 , 15 ]. Protestants are more likely than Catholics, Evangelicals, or Mainliners in the United States to have a collaborative (i.e., science and religion can operate together) or independent (i.e., science and religion refer to different aspects of reality) worldview [ 35 ].…”

“…The idea that religion is incompatible with science has been an interesting discussion, especially in Western countries, for centuries [ 1 ]; K [ [2] , [3] , [4] ]. The research indicates that a strong sense of religiosity may lead to increased skepticism towards science, and the notion of a clash between scientific and religious beliefs can emerge spontaneously [ 4 , 5 ].…”

“…The idea that religion is incompatible with science has been an interesting discussion, especially in Western countries, for centuries [ 1 ]; K [ [2] , [3] , [4] ]. The research indicates that a strong sense of religiosity may lead to increased skepticism towards science, and the notion of a clash between scientific and religious beliefs can emerge spontaneously [ 4 , 5 ]. Unfortunately, most studies are conducted in the context of Western countries such as North America where Christianity dominates and a growing stereotype of Christians that does not support science broadly exists [ 6 ].…”

Non-Monotonic Reasoning in Medieval Theology: Problems and Assumptions

“…How is it possible? In a paper published in 2019, I argued that in order to understand Boethius's position and to maintain together the inferences formulated in natural science, philosophy and theology, we can refer to non-monotonic logic, as a very helpful framework [17].…”

Pavel Florensky’s Theory of Religious Antinomies

“…The operator of consequence C might be also relativized to some set of implicitly or explicitly accepted premises K: C K (X). That set K might also contain the principles and rules of interpretation of X, which is very important in the analysis of religious discourse [44,45]. It is believed that non-monotonic logics are more adequate to the real human reasoning in the conditions of restricted time, or limited access to information.…”