How should scientific theories be interpreted philosophically and theologically? According to Michael Heller there are three possibilities: (a) pseudo-interpretations which contradict physical theory; (b) consistent interpretations which are neutral with respect to the theory’s mathematical structure; (c) exegetical interpretations which restate the mathematical structure in everyday language and are in strict agreement with the theory. Heller is highly critical of (a). Moreover, since physical theories as such “say nothing about religious matters” (c) is ruled out. Therefore, to be valid, an interpretation must be of type (b) and should be taken “seriously but not literally.” Heller adds that science may also serve as a source of insight and metaphor for theology, or provide a suitable context for theological reformulation. Still, theology should interact with the overall scientific image of the world and not with a particular theory. He also suggests that physical theories, with the addition of specific premises, can provide grounds for theological conclusions, and that theological and scientific theories might have mutually dependent or even equivalent implications. Finally, the very existence of successful physical theories poses an important philosophical problem.
| Book Series Index | Next: Isham, C.J. and J.C. Polkinghorne. “The Debate over the Block Universe." |
Email link | Printer-friendly | Feedback | Contributed by: CTNS/Vatican Observatory