Array
(
    [fullTitle] => Science, Religion and Common Sense
    [abstract] => Susan Haack has recently attempted to discredit religion by showing that science is an extended and enhanced version of common sense while religion is not. I argue that Haack’s account is misguided not because science is not an extended version of common sense, as she says. It is misguided because she assumes a very restricted, and thus inadequate, account of common sense. After reviewing several more realistic models of common sense, I conclude that common sense is rich enough to allow various kinds of extensions. Just as science can be correctly seen as an enhanced version of common sense, so also religion.
    [authors] => Array
        (
            [0] => Array
                (
                    [givenName] => Louis
                    [affiliation] => Heythrop College , University of London
                )

        )

    [keywords] => Array
        (
        )

    [doi] => 10.24204/ejpr.v4i4.266
    [datePublished] => 2012-12-22
    [pdf] => https://www.philosophy-of-religion.eu/menuscript/index.php/ejpr/article/view/266/version/215/237
)
"Loading..."

Science, Religion and Common Sense

Louis
Heythrop College , University of London

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24204/ejpr.v4i4.266

Abstract

Susan Haack has recently attempted to discredit religion by showing that science is an extended and enhanced version of common sense while religion is not. I argue that Haack’s account is misguided not because science is not an extended version of common sense, as she says. It is misguided because she assumes a very restricted, and thus inadequate, account of common sense. After reviewing several more realistic models of common sense, I conclude that common sense is rich enough to allow various kinds of extensions. Just as science can be correctly seen as an enhanced version of common sense, so also religion.

Keywords:

Download PDF