The background to this paper is given by the so called ‘science wars’, about whether science is in the business of construction rather than discovery. Is it a mere social practice or a body of knowledge about the real world? At the start of modern science there was no doubt about this, because scientists such as Newton and Boyle started with a firm metaphysical and theological base. Without that, science has become ever more anthropocentric. The question is posed whether, in the face of contemporary suspicion, science can regain its proper authority, unless it can appeal to some grounding beyond itself which can provide it with a rational justification.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
This article is based on a lecture given to a symposium on science and theology at the British Association for the Advancement of Science's 2001 Festival of Science, held at Glasgow University in September 2001. Another of the contributors to the symposium was Harry Collins, a ‘methodological relativist’ about science.
2.
LockeJohn: ‘An essay concerning human understanding’, (ed. NidditchP. H.), 10; 1973, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
3.
KantImmanuel: ‘Critique of pure reason’, (trans. SmithN. Kemp), 22; 1993, London, Macmillan.
4.
For a recent collection of articles from the sociology of science about relativism and science, see ‘The one culture? A conversation about science’, (ed. LabingerJay A. and CollinsHarry); 2001, Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Press.
5.
HumeDavid: ‘Enquiries concerning human understanding and concerning the principles of morals’, (ed. Selby-BiggeL. A.), 3rd edn, 46; 1975, Oxford, Clarendon Press.
6.
For more on relativism and materialism, see my ‘Philosophy matters’ (2002, Oxford, Blackwell).
