The relation between science and theology: the case for complementarity revisited

Abstract

In contrast to D. M. MacKay’s cautious suggestion that ‘we need the logical concept of complementarity in scientific and theological thinking if we want to avoid logical blunders’, none of the eight relationships between science and theology considered by A. R. Peacocke is labelled ‘complementarity’. Thinking in terms of complementarity has now been explored further, both from a psychological perspective and from an epistemological one: for a genuine understanding, certain explananda require pairs of descriptions that refer to different situations/conditions together with pairs of interpretations that are non-compatible. Four distinct types of case are described that command different degrees of consensus, and a definition is given that covers all of them. After presenting adolescents’ ‘complementary’ views on Creation and on their corresponding scientific accounts, such views are assessed with respect to the pertinent definitions and compared with the statements of experts. Broadly speaking, certain criteria for complementarity are met and the adolescents’ views are confirmed by the experts, professionals of the different sciences and theologians. These findings suggest that, under the conditions discussed, the assumption of the complementarity of science and theology is reasonable and useful, both in research and in teaching.