Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-zzh7m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T18:17:55.877Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Religious naturalism and its rivals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 December 2012

MIKAEL STENMARK
MIKAEL STENMARK*
Affiliation:
Department of Theology, Uppsala University, Box 511, 751 20 Uppsala, Sweden e-mail: mikael.stenmark@teol.uu.se
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aim of this article is to explore where and why religious naturalism differs from its rivals, and also to consider some of the challenges religious naturalism faces. I argue that religious naturalism is best conceived as a reaction against both theists who are religious and naturalists who are atheists: the best option is taken to be a naturalist who is religious. Nevertheless, it is quite difficult to say more exactly what claims the view contains. In fact, it is argued, three forms of religious naturalism must be distinguished and contrasted with their rivals, which are taken to be non-religious naturalism, scientific naturalism, theism (including panentheism), divine transcendentalism, religious agnosticism, and religious relativism.

Type
Articles
Information
Religious Studies , Volume 49 , Issue 4 , December 2013 , pp. 529 - 550
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Atkins, Peter (1995) ‘The limitless power of science’, in , J., Cornwell (ed.) Nature's Imagination: The Frontiers of Scientific Vision (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 122–132.Google Scholar
Berger, Peter (2010) ‘Introduction: between relativism and fundamentalism’, in Peter, Berger (ed.) Between Relativism and Fundamentalism (Grand Rapids MI: Eerdmans), 1–13.Google Scholar
Brown, James Robert (2001) Who Rules in Science? (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caro, Mario de & MacArthur, David (2004) ‘Introduction: the nature of naturalism’, in Caro, Mario de & MacArthur, David (eds) Naturalism in Question (London: Harvard University Press), 1–17.Google Scholar
Crosby, Donald A. (2007) ‘Religious naturalism’, in Meister, Chad & Copan, Paul (eds) The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Religion (London: Routledge), 672–681.Google Scholar
Dawkins, Richard (1998) Unweaving the Rainbow (London: Penguin Books).Google Scholar
Dennett, Daniel D. & Plantinga, Alvin (2011) Science and Religion (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Draper, Paul (2002) ‘Seeking but not believing: confessions of a practical agnostic’, in Howard-Snyder, Daniel & Moser, Paul K. (eds) Divine Hiddenness (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 197–214.Google Scholar
Farley, Edward (1996) Divine Empathy (Minneapolis: Fortress Press).Google Scholar
Grigg, Richard (2008) Beyond the God Delusion (Minneapolis: Fortress Press).Google Scholar
Hick, John (1999) The Fifth Dimension (Oxford: OneWorld Publications).Google Scholar
Kaufman, Gordon D. (1981) The Theological Imagination (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press).Google Scholar
Kaufman, Gordon D. (1993) In Face of Mystery (Boston: Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
Kaufman, Gordon D. (2001) ‘On thinking of God as serendipitous creativity’, Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 69, 409–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaufman, Gordon D. (2003) ‘Rejoinder to Mikael Stenmark’, Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 71, 183–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenny, Anthony (2006) What I Believe (London: Continuum).Google Scholar
McFague, Sallie (1987) Models of God (Philadelphia: Fortress Press).Google Scholar
Nagel, Thomas (2010) Secular Philosophy and the Religious Temperament (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Plantinga, Alvin (2000) Warranted Christian Belief (Oxford: Oxford University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plantinga, Alvin (2007) ‘Religion and science’, in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy <www.plato.stanford.edu/entries/religion-science/ > .Google Scholar
Rescher, Nicholas (2007) Issues in the Philosophy of Religion (Frankfurt: Ontos Verlag).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, Alex (2011) The Atheist's Guide to Reality (London: W. W. Norton & Company).Google Scholar
Rue, Loyal (2005) Religion is not about God (New Brunswick, Nj.: Rutgers University Press).Google Scholar
Runzo, Joseph (1988) ‘God, commitment, and other faiths’, Faith and Philosophy, 5, 343–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schellenberg, John L. (2007) The Wisdom to Doubt (Ithaca: Cornell University Press).Google Scholar
Sellars, Wilfred (1963) ‘Empiricism and the philosophy of mind’, in Science, Perception and Reality (London: Routledge), 127–196.Google Scholar
Smith, Quentin (2001) ‘The metaphilosophy of naturalism’, Philo, 4, 195–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stenmark, Mikael (1995) Rationality in Science, Religion and Everyday Life (Notre Dame IN: University of Notre Dame Press).Google Scholar
Stenmark, Mikael (1997) ‘What is scientism?’, Religious Studies, 33, 15–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stenmark, Mikael (2001) Scientism: Science, Ethics and Religion (Aldershot: Ashgate).Google Scholar
Stenmark, Mikael (2003) ‘Science and a personal conception of God: a critical response to Gordon D. Kaufman’, Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 71, 175–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stenmark, Mikael (2004) How to Relate Science and Religion (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).Google Scholar
Stone, Jerome A. (2008) Religious Naturalism Today (New York: SUNY Press).Google Scholar
Tillich, Paul (1951) Systematic Theology, I (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press).Google Scholar
Vanhoozer, Kevin J. (2003) ‘Theology and the condition of postmodernity: a report on knowledge (of God)’, in Vanhoozer, Kevin J. (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Postmodern Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 3–25.Google Scholar