Abstract
The relationship between science and faith is not a given, nor is it objectively defined, but rather depends on personal ways of approaching this relationship. Accordingly, it can be lived as a conflict, i.e. as agency striving to master independent and separate domains or as a process of dialogue or an integral relationship. In this chapter, we suggest that adopting one stance or the other depends on factors that go beyond the rational assessment that a person makes of science or faith. To explain the perspective that people adopt, cross-disciplinary theoretical insights relevant to human beings and their development are decisive. Based on previous research consolidating several theoretical proposals across a diverse disciplinary orientation (mainly philosophy, psychology and neuroscience), we suggest that there are two contrasting paradigms for conceiving of the self and human development, namely, the autonomous self (AS) and the inter-processual self (IPS) (Akrivou K, Orón JV: Challenges of capitalism for virtue and the common good: Inter-disciplinary perspectives. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, 2016). We purport here that, depending on which of these two corresponding backgrounds characterises the person, people will ‘see’ and live the relationship—dialogue between science and faith—differently.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Bibliography
Akrivou, K. (2009). Differentiation and integration in adult development: The role of self-complexity and integrative learning in self-integration. Munich: VDM Verlag.
Akrivou, K., & Bradbury-Huang, H. (2015). Educating integrated catalysts: Transforming business schools toward ethics and sustainability. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 14(2), 222–240.
Akrivou, K., & Bradbury-Huang, H. (2011). Executive catalysts: Predicting sustainable performance amid complex demands. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(5), 9951009.
Akrivou, K., & Orón, J. V. (2016). Two kinds of human integrity: Towards the ethics of inter-processual self (IPS). In K. Akrivou & A. J. G. Sison (Eds.), Challenges of capitalism for virtue and the common good: Inter-disciplinary perspectives. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Akrivou, K., Bolade-Ogunfodun, O., & Adewale, A. A. (2016). Integrated habitus for the common good of the firm: A radically humanistic conception of organizational habitus with systemic human integrity orientation. In K. Akrivou & A. J. G. Sison (Eds.), Challenges of capitalism for virtue and the common good: Interdisciplinary perspectives. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Akrivou, K., Orón, J. V., & Scalzo, G. (2018). The inter-processual self. Towards a personalist virtue ethics proposal for human agency. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Altarejos, F., & Naval, C. (2000). Filosofía de La Educación. Tercera. Pamplona: EUNSA.
Barbour, I. (1966). Issues in science and religion. Washington: Prentice-Hall.
Barbour, I. (2000). When science meets religion: Enemies, strangers or partners. New York: Harper Collins.
Brooke, J. H. (1991). Science and religion: Some historical perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Düsing, K. (2002). La Subjetividad En La Filosofia Clásica Alemana de Kant a Hegel. Una Panorámica a Modo de Programa. Azafea Revista de filosofia, 4, 97–121.
Erikson, E. (1959). Identity and the cycle of life: Selected papers. Psychological Issues, 1(1), 5–165.
Erikson, E (1959. 1963). Childhodd and society. 2nd ed. New York: W.W: Norton.
Erikson, E. (1959. 1997). El Ciclo Vital Completo. Española. Barcelona: Paidos.
Harrison, P. (Ed.). (2010). The Cambridge companion to science and religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Haught, J. F. (2012). Science and faith: A new introduction. New York: Paulist Press.
Orón, J. V. (2014). Neurociencia y Fe : El Sistema de Creencias Como Lugar de Encuentro Interdisciplinar. Scientia et Fides, 2(2), 213–270.
Orón, J. V. (2015). Leonardo Polo’s integrative dynamic as a philosophical framework for understanding neuroscience. Journal of Polian Studies, 2, 109–133.
Orón, J. V., & Sánchez-Cañizares, J. (2017). ¿Es Posible La Reducción Epistemológica? Todo Sistema Necesita Presupuestos Extra-Sistémicos. Anuario filosófico, 50(3), 601–617.
Ratzinger, J. (1990). Retrieving the tradition. Concerning the notion of person in theology. Communio: International Catholic Review, 17(fall), 439–454.
Stenmark, M. (2010). Ways of relating science and religion. In P. Harrison (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to science and religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Orón, J.V., Akrivou, K., Scalzo, G. (2019). Autonomous Self and Inter-Processual Self: Two Ways of Explaining How People “See” and Live Relationships and the Resulting Dialogue Between Science and Faith. In: Billingsley, B., Chappell, K., Reiss, M.J. (eds) Science and Religion in Education. Contemporary Trends and Issues in Science Education, vol 48. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17234-3_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17234-3_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-17233-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-17234-3
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)