A Defense of Partisan-Science: An Assessment of Stenmark's Non-Partisan Science3 |
| |
Authors: | Natasha Dagys |
| |
Affiliation: | Graduate School of Education, University of California , Berkeley , USA |
| |
Abstract: | AbstractIn his influential book “How to Relate Science and Religion,” Mikael Stenmark argues for the legitimateness of what he calls “partisan science”: “science that is aligned with or supports a particular ideology, religion, or worldview over another.” However, he maintains that we should make an exception: the justification phase of science (phase 3) requires neutral science. Thus, he argues for “non-partisan science3.” In this article, I assess his arguments for non-partisan science3. I find them wanting and I will argue for partisan science3 and maintain that we should adhere to “Augustinian” or “theistic science.” |
| |
Keywords: | Non-partisan science3 Partisan science Methodological naturalism Augustinian science Theistic science |
|
|