Should religion shape science?

Abstract

Alvin Plantinga has recently claimed that science is not religiously neutral because it often contains a naturalist bias. He argues that Christians should respond by developing their own kind of science (an "Augustinian science"), a science which is shaped by Christian beliefs and values. I agree with Plantinga that we can find contemporary scientists who presuppose metaphysical naturalism in their scientific reasoning, but I shall also try to show that the reasons Plantinga gives why Christians should respond by developing their own kind of science are not convincing. Instead I argue that the best strategy for Christians and other theists to adopt is to expose naturalist bias in contemporary science and to maintain that religions or ideologies ought not to be included among the grounds for accepting or rejecting theories in science. Moreover, an alternative to both Augustinian science and "Duhemian science" is developed. I also indicate that some interesting parallels could be drawn between Plantinga and his idea of an Augustinian science and those who advocate a science shaped by feminism, Islam, or Marxism.