《教皇与独角兽:科学、基督教以及冲突论如何愚弄世界

D. Hutchings, James C. Ungureanu
{"title":"《教皇与独角兽:科学、基督教以及冲突论如何愚弄世界","authors":"D. Hutchings, James C. Ungureanu","doi":"10.56315/pscf3-23hutchings","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OF POPES & UNICORNS: Science, Christianity, and How the Conflict Thesis Fooled the World by David Hutchings and James C. Ungureanu. New York: Oxford University Press, 2022. 263 pages. Hardcover; $39.95. ISBN: 9780190053093. *Readers of PSCF are familiar with the \"warfare thesis\" for the history of science and religion. This interpretation, framed as a historical analysis that stretches from the ancient Greeks to the modern period, explains the way in which science and religion have always been in conflict with each other. At the center of this interpretation are John William Draper's History of the Conflict between Religion and Science (1874), and Andrew Dickson White's A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom (1896). Since the publication of these books, numerous professional historians as well as the general public have accepted and perpetuated many of the claims made within them. The problem with this line of interpretation, however, is that Draper and White were often wrong. For instance, Christopher Columbus (and people in the medieval period) did not think the earth was flat. Christians did not oppose anesthesia. There was no Dark Ages. Christians did not believe in unicorns. Premodern medical diagnosis did not merely appeal to supernatural causation. And the list could continue. *Instead, as Hutchings and Ungureanu explain over the course of their nine chapters, Christianity--and especially medieval Christianity--was hyper-rational and actively engaged in scientific thought. So, despite the continued influence of Draper and White since the nineteenth century, Hutchings and Ungureanu successfully demonstrate many errors with the historiographical tradition of the warfare thesis. In fact, as the authors argue, there were ways in which science borrowed from theology. This is most noticeable in the utilization of theology to explain science in the period known as the Scientific Revolution, which the authors address in chapter eight, \"Old Dogma, New Tricks.\" Another helpful chapter pertains to the way the ideas of Draper and White resonated with others in the nineteenth century, thereby demonstrating how these two well-known intellectuals were not mere \"lone voices.\" This latter point is a particularly helpful contribution to the topic's historiography, as this type of contextualization is oftentimes forgotten when considering Draper, White, and the warfare thesis. *It is for these reasons and others that many will find this book a helpful aid. The tone is conversational, and the citations are relegated to endnotes at the back of the book. The book also draws upon some of the best scholarship in the history of science from the past fifty years, such as the works of Edward Grant, Bernard Lightman, and the more recent contribution of Seb Faulk. One of the fortunate outcomes, then, is that the reader who reads between the lines will discover a masterful account of the ways in which the field of the history of science has effectively dismantled the warfare thesis, and in its wake established a robust understanding of the complex historical relationship between science and religion. The reader of the book will also be provided with an abbreviated version of one of the authors' works, James Ungureanu's Science, Religion, and the Protestant Tradition (2019), which is summarized in chapter seven, \"Bridges Badly Built.\" *For all its merits, there is one point made occasionally that gives this reviewer pause. At times, the authors come close to ascribing a causal link between Christianity and science, such that Christianity was a dominant driver of scientific development. For instance, in chapter eight, wherein the authors address the positive influence of Christianity on science, they claim that \"Christian dogma has actually played a major part--indeed, many have argued the major part--in establishing the foundations of the science that is so successful today\" (p. 196). It shows up similarly at the end of chapter seven, with an even greater causal connection between Christianity and science. The point in chapter eight is substantiated by a reference to Noah Efron's chapter in Galileo Goes to Jail, titled \"That Christianity Gave Birth to Modern Science.\" While Efron does ascribe an important role to Christianity in scientific development, he stops short of identifying it as the sole cause. Among the reasons for this, as Efron notes, is that it then becomes problematic to include the contributions of non-Christians to science. Yet, the reader Of Popes & Unicorns would not be informed regarding the potential error in over-attributing a causal connection between Christianity and science. In a book aiming to reframe the relationship between science and religion, one would have hoped that they would have nuanced this point, even if in the end they chose to argue for the importance of Christianity on scientific development. *This issue aside, the book is an important contribution to the study of the warfare thesis. Readers of this journal are perhaps aware of previous books on the topic, the most prominent one being Galileo Goes to Jail (2009). Those that are familiar with that book will find a certain amount of overlap in this one, though not complete synonymity. One clear merit is that this book is a comprehensive story, and not discrete chapters. As a result, its content will likely be utilized in many different contexts and read for many years to come. *Reviewed by Brent Purkaple, Visiting Assistant Professor of History, Grand Valley State University, Allendale, MI 49401.","PeriodicalId":53927,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith","volume":"17 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Of Popes & Unicorns: Science, Christianity, and How the Conflict Thesis Fooled the World\",\"authors\":\"D. Hutchings, James C. Ungureanu\",\"doi\":\"10.56315/pscf3-23hutchings\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"OF POPES & UNICORNS: Science, Christianity, and How the Conflict Thesis Fooled the World by David Hutchings and James C. Ungureanu. New York: Oxford University Press, 2022. 263 pages. Hardcover; $39.95. ISBN: 9780190053093. *Readers of PSCF are familiar with the \\\"warfare thesis\\\" for the history of science and religion. This interpretation, framed as a historical analysis that stretches from the ancient Greeks to the modern period, explains the way in which science and religion have always been in conflict with each other. At the center of this interpretation are John William Draper's History of the Conflict between Religion and Science (1874), and Andrew Dickson White's A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom (1896). Since the publication of these books, numerous professional historians as well as the general public have accepted and perpetuated many of the claims made within them. The problem with this line of interpretation, however, is that Draper and White were often wrong. For instance, Christopher Columbus (and people in the medieval period) did not think the earth was flat. Christians did not oppose anesthesia. There was no Dark Ages. Christians did not believe in unicorns. Premodern medical diagnosis did not merely appeal to supernatural causation. And the list could continue. *Instead, as Hutchings and Ungureanu explain over the course of their nine chapters, Christianity--and especially medieval Christianity--was hyper-rational and actively engaged in scientific thought. So, despite the continued influence of Draper and White since the nineteenth century, Hutchings and Ungureanu successfully demonstrate many errors with the historiographical tradition of the warfare thesis. In fact, as the authors argue, there were ways in which science borrowed from theology. This is most noticeable in the utilization of theology to explain science in the period known as the Scientific Revolution, which the authors address in chapter eight, \\\"Old Dogma, New Tricks.\\\" Another helpful chapter pertains to the way the ideas of Draper and White resonated with others in the nineteenth century, thereby demonstrating how these two well-known intellectuals were not mere \\\"lone voices.\\\" This latter point is a particularly helpful contribution to the topic's historiography, as this type of contextualization is oftentimes forgotten when considering Draper, White, and the warfare thesis. *It is for these reasons and others that many will find this book a helpful aid. The tone is conversational, and the citations are relegated to endnotes at the back of the book. The book also draws upon some of the best scholarship in the history of science from the past fifty years, such as the works of Edward Grant, Bernard Lightman, and the more recent contribution of Seb Faulk. One of the fortunate outcomes, then, is that the reader who reads between the lines will discover a masterful account of the ways in which the field of the history of science has effectively dismantled the warfare thesis, and in its wake established a robust understanding of the complex historical relationship between science and religion. The reader of the book will also be provided with an abbreviated version of one of the authors' works, James Ungureanu's Science, Religion, and the Protestant Tradition (2019), which is summarized in chapter seven, \\\"Bridges Badly Built.\\\" *For all its merits, there is one point made occasionally that gives this reviewer pause. At times, the authors come close to ascribing a causal link between Christianity and science, such that Christianity was a dominant driver of scientific development. For instance, in chapter eight, wherein the authors address the positive influence of Christianity on science, they claim that \\\"Christian dogma has actually played a major part--indeed, many have argued the major part--in establishing the foundations of the science that is so successful today\\\" (p. 196). It shows up similarly at the end of chapter seven, with an even greater causal connection between Christianity and science. The point in chapter eight is substantiated by a reference to Noah Efron's chapter in Galileo Goes to Jail, titled \\\"That Christianity Gave Birth to Modern Science.\\\" While Efron does ascribe an important role to Christianity in scientific development, he stops short of identifying it as the sole cause. Among the reasons for this, as Efron notes, is that it then becomes problematic to include the contributions of non-Christians to science. Yet, the reader Of Popes & Unicorns would not be informed regarding the potential error in over-attributing a causal connection between Christianity and science. In a book aiming to reframe the relationship between science and religion, one would have hoped that they would have nuanced this point, even if in the end they chose to argue for the importance of Christianity on scientific development. *This issue aside, the book is an important contribution to the study of the warfare thesis. Readers of this journal are perhaps aware of previous books on the topic, the most prominent one being Galileo Goes to Jail (2009). Those that are familiar with that book will find a certain amount of overlap in this one, though not complete synonymity. One clear merit is that this book is a comprehensive story, and not discrete chapters. As a result, its content will likely be utilized in many different contexts and read for many years to come. *Reviewed by Brent Purkaple, Visiting Assistant Professor of History, Grand Valley State University, Allendale, MI 49401.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53927,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.56315/pscf3-23hutchings\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56315/pscf3-23hutchings","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

《教皇与独角兽:科学、基督教以及冲突论如何愚弄世界》,作者:大卫·哈钦斯和詹姆斯·c·昂古拉努。纽约:牛津大学出版社,2022。263页。精装书;39.95美元。ISBN: 9780190053093。* PSCF的读者对科学史和宗教史的“战争论题”很熟悉。这种解释,作为一种从古希腊一直延伸到现代的历史分析,解释了科学和宗教总是相互冲突的方式。这种解释的核心是约翰·威廉·德雷珀的《宗教与科学的冲突史》(1874)和安德鲁·迪克森·怀特的《基督教世界科学与神学的战争史》(1896)。自从这些书出版以来,许多专业历史学家和普通公众都接受并延续了其中的许多主张。然而,这种解释的问题在于,德雷珀和怀特经常是错误的。例如,克里斯托弗·哥伦布(以及中世纪时期的人们)不认为地球是平的。基督徒并不反对麻醉。没有黑暗时代。基督徒不相信独角兽。前现代医学诊断并不仅仅诉诸于超自然的因果关系。这个名单还可以继续列下去。*相反,正如哈钦斯和昂古拉努在他们的九章中所解释的那样,基督教——尤其是中世纪的基督教——是高度理性的,积极参与科学思想。因此,尽管德雷珀和怀特自19世纪以来一直受到影响,哈钦斯和昂古拉努成功地证明了战争理论的史学传统中的许多错误。事实上,正如两位作者所言,科学在某些方面借鉴了神学。这一点最明显的体现在利用神学来解释科学革命时期的科学,作者在第八章“旧教条,新把戏”中提到了这一点。另一个有用的章节是关于19世纪德雷珀和怀特的思想如何与他人产生共鸣,从而证明这两位著名的知识分子不仅仅是“孤独的声音”。后一点对该主题的史学贡献特别有帮助,因为在考虑德雷珀、怀特和战争论文时,这种类型的语境化经常被遗忘。正是由于这些原因和其他原因,许多人会觉得这本书很有帮助。书的基调是对话式的,引文被放在书后面的尾注里。这本书还借鉴了过去五十年来科学史上一些最好的学术成果,比如爱德华·格兰特、伯纳德·莱特曼的作品,以及最近的Seb Faulk的贡献。幸运的是,读到字里行间的读者会发现,这本书对科学史领域有效地推翻了战争理论的方式进行了精辟的描述,并由此建立了对科学与宗教之间复杂的历史关系的有力理解。这本书的读者还将获得作者之一詹姆斯·昂古拉努的作品《科学、宗教和新教传统》(2019)的缩略版,该作品在第七章“糟糕的桥梁”中进行了总结。*尽管它有很多优点,但偶尔有一点会让笔者停下来。有时,作者几乎把基督教和科学之间的因果关系归结为基督教是科学发展的主要驱动力。例如,在第八章中,作者谈到了基督教对科学的积极影响,他们声称“基督教教义实际上在建立今天如此成功的科学基础方面发挥了重要作用——事实上,许多人认为这是重要的作用”(第196页)。在第七章的结尾也出现了类似的情况,基督教和科学之间有着更大的因果关系。第八章的观点是由诺亚·埃夫隆在《伽利略进监狱》中题为“基督教催生了现代科学”的章节所证实的。虽然埃夫隆确实认为基督教在科学发展中发挥了重要作用,但他没有将其视为唯一的原因。正如埃夫隆所指出的,其中一个原因是,把非基督徒对科学的贡献包括进来就会有问题。然而,《教皇与独角兽》的读者不会被告知过度归因于基督教与科学之间因果关系的潜在错误。在一本旨在重新构建科学与宗教关系的书中,人们本希望他们能对这一点进行细致入微的阐述,即使最后他们选择论证基督教对科学发展的重要性。 *撇开这个问题不谈,这本书对战争理论的研究有重要贡献。本杂志的读者可能知道以前关于这个主题的书,最著名的是伽利略去监狱(2009)。那些熟悉那本书的人会在这本书中发现一些重叠,尽管不是完全的同义词。一个明显的优点是,这本书是一个全面的故事,而不是分散的章节。因此,它的内容可能会在许多不同的上下文中被使用,并在未来的许多年里被阅读。*由布伦特·普尔普尔评论,历史学客座助理教授,格兰谷州立大学,艾伦代尔,密歇根州49401。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Of Popes & Unicorns: Science, Christianity, and How the Conflict Thesis Fooled the World
OF POPES & UNICORNS: Science, Christianity, and How the Conflict Thesis Fooled the World by David Hutchings and James C. Ungureanu. New York: Oxford University Press, 2022. 263 pages. Hardcover; $39.95. ISBN: 9780190053093. *Readers of PSCF are familiar with the "warfare thesis" for the history of science and religion. This interpretation, framed as a historical analysis that stretches from the ancient Greeks to the modern period, explains the way in which science and religion have always been in conflict with each other. At the center of this interpretation are John William Draper's History of the Conflict between Religion and Science (1874), and Andrew Dickson White's A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom (1896). Since the publication of these books, numerous professional historians as well as the general public have accepted and perpetuated many of the claims made within them. The problem with this line of interpretation, however, is that Draper and White were often wrong. For instance, Christopher Columbus (and people in the medieval period) did not think the earth was flat. Christians did not oppose anesthesia. There was no Dark Ages. Christians did not believe in unicorns. Premodern medical diagnosis did not merely appeal to supernatural causation. And the list could continue. *Instead, as Hutchings and Ungureanu explain over the course of their nine chapters, Christianity--and especially medieval Christianity--was hyper-rational and actively engaged in scientific thought. So, despite the continued influence of Draper and White since the nineteenth century, Hutchings and Ungureanu successfully demonstrate many errors with the historiographical tradition of the warfare thesis. In fact, as the authors argue, there were ways in which science borrowed from theology. This is most noticeable in the utilization of theology to explain science in the period known as the Scientific Revolution, which the authors address in chapter eight, "Old Dogma, New Tricks." Another helpful chapter pertains to the way the ideas of Draper and White resonated with others in the nineteenth century, thereby demonstrating how these two well-known intellectuals were not mere "lone voices." This latter point is a particularly helpful contribution to the topic's historiography, as this type of contextualization is oftentimes forgotten when considering Draper, White, and the warfare thesis. *It is for these reasons and others that many will find this book a helpful aid. The tone is conversational, and the citations are relegated to endnotes at the back of the book. The book also draws upon some of the best scholarship in the history of science from the past fifty years, such as the works of Edward Grant, Bernard Lightman, and the more recent contribution of Seb Faulk. One of the fortunate outcomes, then, is that the reader who reads between the lines will discover a masterful account of the ways in which the field of the history of science has effectively dismantled the warfare thesis, and in its wake established a robust understanding of the complex historical relationship between science and religion. The reader of the book will also be provided with an abbreviated version of one of the authors' works, James Ungureanu's Science, Religion, and the Protestant Tradition (2019), which is summarized in chapter seven, "Bridges Badly Built." *For all its merits, there is one point made occasionally that gives this reviewer pause. At times, the authors come close to ascribing a causal link between Christianity and science, such that Christianity was a dominant driver of scientific development. For instance, in chapter eight, wherein the authors address the positive influence of Christianity on science, they claim that "Christian dogma has actually played a major part--indeed, many have argued the major part--in establishing the foundations of the science that is so successful today" (p. 196). It shows up similarly at the end of chapter seven, with an even greater causal connection between Christianity and science. The point in chapter eight is substantiated by a reference to Noah Efron's chapter in Galileo Goes to Jail, titled "That Christianity Gave Birth to Modern Science." While Efron does ascribe an important role to Christianity in scientific development, he stops short of identifying it as the sole cause. Among the reasons for this, as Efron notes, is that it then becomes problematic to include the contributions of non-Christians to science. Yet, the reader Of Popes & Unicorns would not be informed regarding the potential error in over-attributing a causal connection between Christianity and science. In a book aiming to reframe the relationship between science and religion, one would have hoped that they would have nuanced this point, even if in the end they chose to argue for the importance of Christianity on scientific development. *This issue aside, the book is an important contribution to the study of the warfare thesis. Readers of this journal are perhaps aware of previous books on the topic, the most prominent one being Galileo Goes to Jail (2009). Those that are familiar with that book will find a certain amount of overlap in this one, though not complete synonymity. One clear merit is that this book is a comprehensive story, and not discrete chapters. As a result, its content will likely be utilized in many different contexts and read for many years to come. *Reviewed by Brent Purkaple, Visiting Assistant Professor of History, Grand Valley State University, Allendale, MI 49401.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
57.10%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Digital Public Square: Christian Ethics in a Technological Society Real Structures and Divine Action Externalism: A Solution to Benacerraf's Problem Virtue and Artificial Intelligence Did the New Testament Authors Believe the Earth Is Flat? Modifying Our Genes: Theology, Science and “Playing God”
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1