WEKO3
アイテム
進化生物学に基づいた宗教的言説の考察 : 新たな形態の創造論とそれを取り巻く諸理論の現状
https://doi.org/10.15083/00030390
https://doi.org/10.15083/0003039009f5d787-39a3-45c4-a565-212f51223491
名前 / ファイル | ライセンス | アクション |
---|---|---|
![]() |
|
Item type | 紀要論文 / Departmental Bulletin Paper(1) | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
公開日 | 2014-08-06 | |||||
タイトル | ||||||
タイトル | 進化生物学に基づいた宗教的言説の考察 : 新たな形態の創造論とそれを取り巻く諸理論の現状 | |||||
言語 | ||||||
言語 | jpn | |||||
資源タイプ | ||||||
資源 | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 | |||||
タイプ | departmental bulletin paper | |||||
ID登録 | ||||||
ID登録 | 10.15083/00030390 | |||||
ID登録タイプ | JaLC | |||||
その他のタイトル | ||||||
その他のタイトル | Religious Discourses Based on Evolutionary Theory : Contemporary Neo-Creationism and its Antagonists | |||||
著者 |
藤井, 修平
× 藤井, 修平 |
|||||
著者別名 | ||||||
識別子 | 66750 | |||||
識別子Scheme | WEKO | |||||
姓名 | Fujii, Shuhei | |||||
著者所属 | ||||||
著者所属 | 東京大学大学院 | |||||
抄録 | ||||||
内容記述タイプ | Abstract | |||||
内容記述 | This paper examines several discourses which are connected with evolutionary theory, including Intelligent Design (ID) and the Theistic Evolution Theory from late twentieth century to the present. In order to classify these various discourses, the author draws on Ian Barbour’s typology of the four kinds of relationships between science and religion: conflict, independence, dialogue, and integration. In the “conflict” category, ID is a burgeoning theory. According to ID theory, the organisms of living things are too complex for the Neo-Darwinian theory to explain their origin. Therefore, the conclusion that these organisms must be designed by an intelligent designer is drawn. ID is different from the old creationist theories in that there is an absence of theological statements about God or the Bible. With regard to “dialogue” or “integration”, theologians like Arthur Peacocke and John Haught search for the ways to reconcile science with Christian faith. They make some modifications of their theology in accordance with scientific views. These attempts should be called the “Theology of Nature”, or in the field of Biology, “Theistic Evolution Theory”. While these theologians articulate their own stance, some biologists have different perspectives. Stephen Jay Gould, a theorist in the “independence” category, argues that science and religion are compatible since they are each preoccupied with their own individual concerns. On the contrary, Richard Dawkins claims that biological “nature” can show an ethical standard, and therefore religion is not necessary for us. He clearly indicates his understanding of the relationship between religion and science to be one of “conflict”. After discussing these various positions, this paper turns to Phillip Johnson’s criticism of “naturalism”. It states that the “methodological naturalism” which all scientific disciplines presuppose is not compatible with theism. Johnson calls naturalism “the established religious philosophy of America”, and he criticizes it for having an overarching influence across academic fields. In conclusion, the author elucidates the relationship between religion and science in these discourses. When an objection is raised against the Neo-Darwinian theory, any opponent of Neo-Darwinism can use it to support of his or her statement, theory or faith. Thus, academic critics of Neo-Darwinism and various supporters of creationism can be regarded as indirect collaborators. At the same time, it can also be seen that arguments in the field of Biology must address the question of human values. | |||||
内容記述 | ||||||
内容記述タイプ | Other | |||||
内容記述 | 論文/Articles | |||||
書誌情報 |
東京大学宗教学年報 巻 31, p. 83-100, 発行日 2014-03-31 |
|||||
ISSN | ||||||
収録物識別子タイプ | ISSN | |||||
収録物識別子 | 02896400 | |||||
書誌レコードID | ||||||
収録物識別子タイプ | NCID | |||||
収録物識別子 | AN10032645 | |||||
出版者 | ||||||
出版者 | 東京大学文学部宗教学研究室 | |||||
出版者別名 | ||||||
Department of Religious Studies. The University of Tokyo |