Running head: BARBOUR’S MODEL

Barbour's Model

Student's Name

Institutional Affiliation
BARBOUR’S MODEL 2

Describe Ian Barbour's model of the relationships between science and religion

Ian Barbour's model describes the relationship between science and religion as two

subjects that share a common ground rather than concluding that they are in eternal conflict. The

late Ian Barbour was both a physics and religious professor who is credited for establishing a

framework that shows the interaction between science and religion. Barbour notes that the

problem existing between science and religion is epistemological.

In his well-known book, Religion in an Age of Science, Barbour states that the main

challenge in believing in religion is the success of scientific methods and phenomena (Barbour,

1990). He observes that the success of science has prevented human beings from believing in

other approaches to truth, including religion. Specifically, the conflict between the two is

epistemological whereby most people view science to be rational, subjective, universal and

founded on solid evidence whereas religion is parochial, subjective, emotional and founded by

traditions that are on disagreement (Barbour, 1990). Using his model, Barbour identifies four

types of that result in a common understanding based on conflations and simple dichotomies.

The primary purpose of Barbour's science religion model is to dispel the common belief that

religion and science are embedded in a never-ending conflict.

Which of the four types of relationship does the author seem to prefer, and why?

The four types of relationships that Ian Barbour seems to prefer to include conflict,

independence, dialogue and interpretation to show the interaction between religion and science.

He applies these four aspects to various field of interest that has been explained using both

religious and scientific knowledge. The fields of interest include evolution and ongoing creation,

astronomy, creation, genetics, the effect of quantum physics, human nature and neuroscience.
BARBOUR’S MODEL 3

Barbour seems to reject the conflicted relationship and prefers to incorporate independence

dialogue and integration to identify the relationship between science and religion.

The first category, conflict, is an aspect rejected by Barbour because of the belief that one

is true when then the other is entirely false. The conflict is greatest in matters creation and

evolution where theologists believe that evolution is false since it does not conform to bible

teaching, while scientists believe that creation is false because evolution is backed up by

evidence. The second category, independence, asserts both religion and science can be true as

long as they are differentiated in separate domains. Religion tells us whey while science answers

how and using either is inappropriate (Russel, 2017). In matters creation and evolution, God,

who is the sole creator, answers why things were created as they are while science answers how

that happened. The third category is the dialogue model where scientists and religious people act

as conversation partners with knowledge in the fields of interests mentioned above. There is a

need for mutual respect and academic training to ensure that both parties are well versed. The

integration asserts that the truth in religion and science can be integrated to be whole (Russel,

2017). The four categories have had a great impact on the religion science dialogue and Barbour

prefers the last three because they dispel the idea that religion and science will always conflict.

Do you agree with his assessment? Why or why not?

I agree with Barbour's assessment of the relationship between science and religion using

the four categories because they all expound on how science and religion can be related, as

mentioned above. The four relationships adequately address the never-ending conflict between

scientists and religious believers. Hover, the integration category can be hard to practice because

both scientific and religious claims may not be truthful and integrating the two can lead to a

bitter ending with no conclusions.

BARBOUR’S MODEL 4

References

Barbour, I. G. (1990). Religion in an Age of Science (pp. 1989-1990). San Francisco: Harper &

Row.

Russell, R. J. (2017). Ian Barbour's Methodological Breakthrough: Creating the "Bridge"

Between Science and Theology. Theology and Science, 15(1), 28-41.