Such a continuum reveals significant differences, but no sharp lines can be drawn. Objective controls are less prominent and variations in individual and cultural interpretation are more evident as we move across the disciplinary spectrum from the natural sciences, through the social sciences and history, to religion. The data of science are theory-laden, while the events of history are interpretation-laden. In historical inquiry, subjectivity and cultural relativism are more evident than in scientific inquiry, but I submit that this is a difference of degree rather than an absolute distinction. We can acknowledge such constraints while recognizing that the standards and methodological assumptions of historians, like those of every community of inquiry, reflect intellectual assumptions that vary among cultures and historical periods. Historians are held responsible by their colleagues to justify their inferences and conclusions by the citation of historical evidence. There are common standards, which go beyond private judgment. The interaction among historians provides some correction for personal limitations and individual biases. Scholarly integrity requires open-mindedness, self-criticism, and fidelity to evidence. The American Civil War, for example, can be seen variously as part of the history of slavery or of federal union, states’ rights, regional economies, ethical concerns, or democratic ideals.īut despite the presence of interpretation, the historian cannot ignore the demands of objectivity understood as intersubjective testability. Meaning always depends on contexts historical writing exhibits a dialectic between individual events and larger wholes. The historian Carl Becker writes, 'The history of any event is never precisely the same to two different persons, and it is well known that every generation writes the same history in a new way, and puts upon it a new construction.' 1 A historical narrative has a coherence of meaningful patterns and unifying themes that are partly a product of the narrator’s vision. Changing cultural presuppositions also affect perceptions of what is significant in the social world. The interests and commitments of historians influence the way they select from among the myriad details those that might be relevant to a historical account. How might one compare historical explanation with scientific explanation? Five distinctive features of historical explanation have been proposed. In addition, religious stories are related to particular events in history, and so we need to look at the relationships between story and history in religious thought. Nature is understood in historical and evolutionary terms, and science itself is acknowledged to be a historical and culturally conditioned enterprise.

But there is today a new recognition of the importance of history in science. History is usually grouped in the curriculum with the humanities rather than with the social sciences because it deals with the unrepeatable ideas and actions of human agents. How might we respond to the challenge of religious pluralism today?Ī brief examination of the nature of historical inquiry can contribute to the comparison of the methods of science and religion.

A final question is whether we have to accept relativism if we abandon absolute claims. Another question that has received extensive discussion in both science and religion is whether objectivity is possible if it is recognized that all knowledge is historically and culturally conditioned. We must ask first about the character of historical inquiry, since nature itself is historical, as are the scientific and religious communities.

There are indeed striking similarities, but also significant differences, and both need discussion if we are to represent these two areas of human life fairly. We can now pursue some additional comparisons. A number of parallels in religion were proposed. The general structure of science has been described in terms of data, theory, models, and paradigms (or programs). By Ian Barbour Chapter 3: Similarities and Differences

Christianity subsume other traditions