Responses and clarifications regarding science and worldviews

Abstract

This article responds to the other 10 papers in this thematic issue on science and worldviews and it clarifies some of the points in my lead article. The Bayesian framework provides helpful structure for worldview inquiries by recognizing and integrating both public and personal evidence. Drawing upon the other 10 papers, six kinds of potential evidence or considerations are identified: the problem of evil, evolution, miracles and prayer, the Anthropic Principle, religious experience, and natural theology. The thesis is defended that considerations informing worldview convictions include public evidence from the sciences and the humanities and personal evidence from individual experience. Additional topics addressed briefly include scientific realism, the tentativeness of scientific knowledge, science's presuppositions, the relationship between natural science and natural theology, the nature of religious faith, and the importance of philosophy in science education. Seven questions are posed for which further leadership from the AAAS and NAS would benefit the scientific community. © 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.