In the preceding two chapters we considered the impact of knowledge of the world and of knowledge of humans on various arguments about the relationship between religion and science. In this final part I move on from discussions on particular issues to a general articulation of my own position on science, reality, and religion. I also intend to present arguments against the two alternatives which I consider most challenging. Some dismiss all forms of religion by opting for a more radical naturalism which conflicts with those elements in my naturalism that provide minimal room for religion, i.e. conceptual and explanatory non-reductionism (CEN) and limit questions (LQ). Others opt for a richer naturalism which seeks to salvage religion in a realist way by giving a less prominent place to the natural sciences, and in particular to physics and functional, evolutionary explanations (thus contra CR, PP, EEP; see also [2]). In addition to opposing other views, I will also indicate how one can articulate some form of personal faith and theology in the context of the naturalism defended here.

To achieve these ends, I will draw together the various elements of the naturalist view in three sections dealing with science, reality, and religion. Firstly, in the naturalist view developed here the natural sciences play a major role. I will argue that the significance of science for our view of the world does not elevate science to a position beyond the naturalist view. The main contributor to a naturalist view can be understood and justified naturalistically [27]. Secondly, we will consider a naturalist understanding of reality and the consequences this has for religious views [28].