From the desk of the THES: Science, religion and dispute

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=413553&c=2 will link you to a Times Higher Education article about science, religion and their compatibility within the Academy. It is a fascinating topic, and one, I would argue, that is highly relevant. Speaking personally I would like to do more work on this - as a historian who is a Christian it's an area which I feel will be of great relevance to me. However even for those who intend to avoid religion and faith this is still a subject that should be picked up upon.

If I had any criticism of the THE piece, it is that it's too focussed on the 'science/religion' divide. As I'm sure I've said before (and if I haven't then I really should have), Christianity is an holistic paradigm - one cannot be a Christian simply philosophically or scientifically. As such this article touches upon one of the key academic methodological questions; to what extent should one's existing prejudices shape one's research. A more extreme example of this is summarised in Jeremy Black and Donald Macraild's Studying History (3rd edition, 2007)*, which has a brief section worth reading on Marxist historiography in the Soviet Union. They point to the work of M.N Pokrovskii, whose A History of Russia from the Earliest Times (1932) was 'the first full scale attempt to apply Marxist economic imperatives to the formation of Russian society and culture'. Now it may be possible, and even advisable, to do research on this subject in order to gain a greater understanding of Russian society and culture. Indeed Pokrovskii was probably someone with a genuine faith in Marxism (and thus in its role in historical analysis). As Black and Macraild point out though Pokrovskii's Short History of Russia (1920) was approved of by Lenin personally. This would seem to indicate that Pokrovskii was probably sailing somewhat close to the rocks of subjectivity and personal projection (topics hopefully covered in that post on Historiography I promised some time ago).

Ultimately it is impossible to be entirely objective about any subject the more complicated one's work on it becomes. To the best of my understanding this applies scientifically as well as in the humanities. The question is whether one's core beliefs stand up to categorical analysis. Now my belief in God has so far - I believe that being a Christian and being an Historian are compatible. You need to be careful though in applying said beliefs. Personal interpretation of relationships is one thing; personal projection of facts another.

I'm aware that some non-believers reading this may doubt whether or not a Christian can really mount a rigorous intellectual analysis. I discovered this passage the other day, and I do take some comfort in it. This is a extract from Job 13, verses 7-10:

'Are you defending God with lies? Do you make your dishonest arguments for His sake?....No, you will be in trouble with him if you secretly slant your testimony in His favour'.

Or more simply, 'Thou shalt not bear false witness'.





* The disclosure of relevant information section: Jeremy Black is my second supervisor.