The view from the lab bench

Denis R. Alexander

Abstract of a presentation to the 2001 Christians in Science Annual Meeting.

Reliable scientific knowledge is based on the intrinsic coherence of the properties of matter coupled to the ability of human reason to investigate and describe them using models and theories. For Christians it is the work of God in creation that undergirds the properties of matter as well as human rationality. Within the theistic framework, all scientific descriptions are accounts, however inadequate and incomplete, of God's creative actions.

Assuming such a theistic framework for science, the question still remains as to how scientists in practice can construct a body of reliable knowledge that can attract universal assent. To achieve this aim, the scientific community has in place a highly structured set of assumptions and practices. Intriguingly, the view from the lab bench about how scientific theories should be justified shares much in common with the stance taken by the Christian community as it justifies its beliefs, a fact no doubt explained by the long history of fruitful interactions between the two enterprises. These shared approaches in the quest for reliable knowledge include the following:

1. Empiricism. Most branches of science depend heavily on the design of experiments and the collection of data. Theories are viewed as more reliable as the data stack up that support them and likewise decline in favour with the accumulation of refuting counter-evidence. The experimental approach is heavily dependent on reliable witnesses telling the truth about their results. Fraud fatally undermines the scientific enterprise. Christians share the empirical attitudes of scientists towards the justification of their beliefs.

2. A communal approach. Research is typically carried out in teams. Publication depends on peer-review. Scientific knowledge is public. No single individual is allowed to be the sole arbiter of truth. The Christian faith also is a community enterprise, and the community acts to guard Biblical truth and exert peer-pressure when individuals veer off on tangents. 3. The search for coherence. Both the scientific and Christian enterprises represent the search for coherence, albeit at different levels of generality.

4. Objectivity. Although complete objectivity is impossible in practice, a high degree of objectivity in assessing data can be promoted through the processes of communal assessment and peer-review.

5. Refutation. The ability, or inability, in both principle and practice, to obtain refuting data, plays a key role in the acceptance of scientific theories and has application also in the assessment of Christian beliefs.

6. Prediction. Many scientific theories are deemed more reliable according to their ability to predict outcomes that are subsequently confirmed by data.

Bibliography

Denis Alexander, 'Rebuilding the Matrix - Science and Faith in the 21st Century'. Lion Publishing, 2001.

John Ziman, 'Real Science - What it is, and what it means'. CUP, 2000.