The Demarcation Problem
Ethical, moral, 8 and theological 9 implications and applications of scientifi c
fi ndings are particularly divisive. For example, many scientists use a philo-
sophical approach called methodological naturalism 10 which presupposes
the absence of supernatural agency. 11 Thus, any explanations allowing for
such agency (e.g., intelligent design) are excluded out of hand. Other
scientists do not exclude supernaturalism and believe that the scientifi c
enterprise may include such considerations. 12 Unfortunately, the former
worldview reigns supreme in the academy today.
Although some scientists argue that they are uniquely equipped to dif-
ferentiate science from nonscience, a cursory review of scientists’ musings
on philosophy affi rms that many are woefully ignorant of the most basic
philosophical principles of sound logic. 13 There is also dispute on how
confi dent we should be in the fi ndings of historical science (e.g., paleon-
tology) compared to contemporary empirical fi ndings (e.g., antibacterial
treatment effi cacy). 14 J.P. Moreland and William Lane Craig say:
Empirical science...focuses on how the natural world operates in a repeat-
able and regular way. Historical science...focuses on single, past events (e.g.,
the death of dinosaurs, the origin of fi rst life) and attempts to explain how
things came to be or why some event happened. 15
In other words, are the fi ndings of archaeologists and paleontologists less
certain than those of microbiologists? So much animus exists between
contemporary atheist polemicists and their opponents that it is very dif-
fi cult to distinguish scientifi c evidence from worldview inferences. Absent
such heated confl ict, scientists would certainly agree that historical science
fi ndings are less certain than those of contemporary science. Further, we
are of the opinion that science must incorporate the contributions of both
theology and philosophy.
Advantages and Limitations of Science
Even with the problems outlined above, science is the best game in town
for understanding the nature of physical reality and for solving techno-
logical problems, but it is found wanting in philosophical and theologi-
cal arenas. Science is essentially objective, empirical, testable, systematic,
and often repeatable (except for historical sciences). On the minus side,
SURPRISING BEDFELLOWS: THEOLOGY AND SCIENCE INTERPRETATION... 281
