On 19 Dec 95 17:37:38 EST you wrote:
JB>Continuing the discussion(s) of whether or not Methodological
>Naturalism ought to continue to be a presupposition for people when
>they "do science," (but not when they "do philosophy, history, etc.)
>-- I came on this quotation from Donald M. MacKay from PERPECTIVES,
>Vol 38, Number 2, June 1986, page 67:
>
>"The scientist is by profession a map-maker; and like other
>map-makers he is pledged to allow his own particular values to
>distort as little as possible the representation he makes of the
>state of affairs. 'Whether I like it or not, or you like it or not,
>that's the way it is as far as I can see.' In this sense, he strives
>to make scientific knowledge 'value-free.' His maps are meant to be
>reliable guides to other people, of whose values he knows nothing; so
>'scientific detachment' and 'depersonalization,' far from being
>arbitrary eccentricities of the trade, are all part of his duty as an
>honest craftsman.... His maps are not merely of observables but of
>correlations between observables and (in de course) of interacting
>causal factors."
>The essay from which this is taken is titled "Christian
>Priorities in Science." It is a classic.
Thanks for this. Indeed this map analogy is a powerful one, but it is
not just applicable to science, but also to those who do philosophy
and theology, as Ramm points out:
"The knowledge of God is the authentic map of the spiritual order.
The spiritual order is the total number of relationships established
by God between himself and his creation, and more particularly those
relationships established by God between himself and man. It has been
the philosophers who have metaphorically spoken of human knowledge as
having the structure of a map. There is unusually happy feature to
this analogy and one which particularly suits theology. A map first
of all conveys certain knowledge. It is one of the many symbolic
systems available to man by which he can present a certain number of
facts and their relationships. But the purpose of the typical map is
to enable a person to find his way around. Equipped with a set of
maps (national, state, and county) a tourist is prepared to find his
way to any place of national significance or scenic beauty in America.
The "map" of the science of chemistry is thus not only a certain body
of information about chemicals but it enables the chemist to "move
about," to "find his way" in the subject matter of chemistry. And in
theology, the knowledge of God as an authentic map not only conveys to
man what he needs to know of the spiritual order, but also how he may
"move about" and "find his way" in the spiritual order." (Ramm B.
"Special Revelation and the Word of God", Eerdmans: Grand Rapids Mi,
1961, p13).
The beauty of this map analogy is that one can easily see that
different maps can validly represent the same area in different
ways. For example, a map can be:
Physical - natural surface features
Geological - subterranean minerals
Political - government
Geographic - human features (eg. cities, roads, etc)
Maps are highly abstract, simplified representations of one complex
underlying reality - there is one reality called Australia, but an
almost infinite number of possible maps of that one reality.
Genesis 1 is a theological map of the origin and development of the
earth from a theological perspective. The same events could be
"mapped" from an astrophysical perspective. Both representations
are equally valid, for what they are trying to represent.
The problem comes when mapmakers think that their map is the
exclusive reality. For example, the maker of a physical map might
thinks his map is the "real" one and a political map is not
really a true map. Similarly, a Dawkins might think his Darwinist
map is exclusively real and a Theist's map is fantasy.
Each different map has a priority in its own sphere. The theological
map in Genesis 1 is a high level map that represents the origin
of the Earth and its inhabitants and their relationship to God. In
this sphere it is supreme. A scientific map of the same events should
not assert priority outside its jurisdiction and pontificate about
God. Equally a theological map should not make statements about
science.
However, there is a possible exception and that is where there is an
intersection of jurisdictions. In the case of ultimate origins of the
living world, both the theological and scientific maps intersect on
the same topic. The theological map says "And the LORD God formed
man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the
breath
of life; and man became a living soul" (Gn 2:7) and the scientific map
says that man descended from a primate ancestor, through various
hominid stages and his nearest living relative today is a chimpanzee.
Even here there may not be intersection. These two maps may be
complementary, just as in Gn 1:24-25 land animals are depicted as both
having been produced by natural processes"Let the earth bring
forth...beast of the earth after his kind" (Gn 1:24) and yet they are
also a creation of God: "God made the beast ofthe earth after his
kind..." (Gn 1:25).
I believe there is intersection between the theological and scientific
maps, but there probably will never be enough data to resolve it. For
example, the Flood should have left sediment, but then again, it is
possible (even probable) that God, as part of the process of removing
the waters by "a wind to pass over the earth" (Gn 8:1. same word as
"spirit" in Gn 1:2), that God removed the mud and the decaying bodies
of Noah's former countrymen. Similarly, if Acanthostega grew a foot
from a fin, by a stimulation of HOX genes (TIME, August 7, 1995, p69),
or if the Cambrian Explosion resulted from the sudden appearance of
"set-aside" cells (New Scientist, 2 December 1995, p23), neither
science nor theology can penetrate back to the unique series of events
that caused these crucial origin events to happen in that way and no
other.
This map analogy is why I believe that it is worthwhile developing a
two-"Adam" model, despite Denis' pre-emptive dismissal of such a
project as "concordism". If the theological and the scientific maps
are validly describing the same complex, underlying reality, then it
should be possible to develop a special map that shows how the two
maps are complementary.
Happy New Year!
Stephen
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| Stephen Jones | ,--_|\ | sjones@iinet.net.au |
| 3 Hawker Ave | / Oz \ | sjones@odyssey.apana.org.au |
| Warwick 6024 |->*_,--\_/ | http://www.iinet.net.au/~sjones/ |
| Perth, Australia | v | phone +61 9 448 7439 |
----------------------------------------------------------------