Abstract
In their article “Nature of Evidence in Religion and Natural Science” (Theology & Science 2020), Petteri Nieminen and colleagues compare the use of evidence in religion and science. Their claim is that religious use of evidence is characterized by “experiential” thinking and confirmation bias, which makes integration with science difficult. I argue, however, that their methodology is unreliable and their theory of religious cognition is too simplistic. Further research should take the complexity of “science,” “religion” and “rationality” more sufficiently into account.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Rope Kojonen, E. V. (2021). Bias in the Science and Religion Dialogue? A Critique of “Nature of Evidence in Religion and Natural Science.” Theology and Science, 19(3), 188–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/14746700.2021.1944497
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.