Modeling Mystery

William Wood

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/SetF.2016.007

Abstract


The practice of model-building is very common in analytic philosophical theology. Yet many other theologians worry that any attempt to model God must be hubristic and idolatrous. A better understanding of scientific modeling can set the stage for a more fruitful engagement between analytic theologians and their critics. I first present an account of scientific modeling that draws on recent work in the philosophy of science. I then apply that account to a prominent analytic model of the trinity, Michael Rea and Jeffrey Brower’s “material constitution model.” I argue that modeling – whether scientific or theological – need not be understood as a hubristic enterprise. A model does not always try to grasp its target at all, let alone grasp it fully and completely. Even theologians who are committed to a strong doctrine of divine mystery can therefore find value in analytic modeling.


Keywords


Analytic Theology; Analogy; transcendence; trinity

Full Text:

PDF

References


Barbour, Ian. 1974. Myths, Models and Paradigms: The Nature of Scientific and Religious Language. SCM.

Brower, Jeffrey E. and Rea, Michael C. 2005. “Material Constitution and the Trinity.” Faith and Philosophy 22: 57–76.

Burrell, David. 2008. “Creator / Creatures Relation: ‘The Distinction’ vs. ‘Onto-Theology’.” Faith and Philosophy 25: 177–189.

Cross, Richard. 2008. “Idolatry and Religious Language.” Faith and Philosophy 25:190–96.

Forrest, Peter. 2000. “A Philosophical Case for Kenosis.” Religious Studies 36: 127–40.

Giere, Ronald N. 1988. Explaining Science: A Cognitive Approach. University of Chicago Press.

Godfrey-Smith, Peter. 2006. “The Strategy of Model-Based Science.” Biology and Philosophy 21: 725–40.

Godfrey-Smith, Peter. 2006. “Theories and Models in Metaphysics.” Harvard Review of Philosophy 14: 4–19.

Godfrey-Smith, Peter. 2012. “Metaphysics and the Philosophical Imagination.” Philosophical Studies 160: 97–113.

Hart, David Bentley. 2013. The Experience of God: Being, Consciousness, Bliss. Yale University Press.

Hasker, William. 2008. “On Behalf of the Pagans and the Idolaters: A Response to Burrell.” Faith and Philosophy 25: 197–204.

Hasker, William. 2013. Metaphysics and the Tri-Personal God. Oxford University Press.

Hesse, Mary. 2000. “Models and Analogies” in A Companion to the Philosophy of Science, W. H. Newton-Smith, ed., 299–307. Blackwell.

Holmes, Stephen R. 2012. The Quest for the Trinity: The Doctrine of God in Scripture, History and Modernity. InterVarsity Press.

LaCugna, Catherine Mowry. 1986. “Philosophers and Theologians on the Trinity.” Modern Theology 2: 169–81.

Leftow, Brian. 2004. “A Latin Trinity.” Faith and Philosophy 21: 304–333.

Leftow, Brian. 2009. “Omnipotence” in The Oxford Handbook of Philosophical Theology, Thomas Flint and Michael Rea, eds., 167–198. Oxford University Press.

Marion, Jean-Luc. 1991. God Without Being. University of Chicago Press.

Marion, Jean-Luc. 2002. Prolegomena to Charity. Fordham University Press.

Marmodoro, Anna and Hill, Jonathan, eds. 2011. The Metaphysics of the Incarnation. Oxford University Press.

McCall, Thomas. 2010. Which Trinity? Whose Monotheism? Philosophical and Systematic Theologians on the Metaphysics of Trinitarian Theology. Eerdmans.

McMullin, Ernan. 1985. “Galilean Idealization.” Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 16: 247–273.

Milbank, John. The Future of Love: Essays in Political Theology. SCM.

Moore, Andrew. 2011. “Reason” in Oxford Handbook of Systematic Theology, John Webster, ed., 394–412. Oxford University Press.

Morris, Thomas V. The Logic of God Incarnate. Cornell University Press.

Odenbaugh, Jay. 2005. “Idealized, Inaccurate but Successful: A Pragmatic Approach to Evaluating Models in Theoretical Ecology.” Biology and Philosophy 20: 231–255.

Polkinghorne, John. 1998. Science and Theology: An Introduction. SPCK.

Potter, Michael. 2004. Set Theory and its Philosophy. Oxford University Press.

Ramsey, Ian. 1957. Religious Language: An Empirical Placing of its Theological Phrases. SCM.

Ramsey, Ian. 1964. Models and Mystery. Oxford University Press

Rea, Michael C. 2009. “Introduction”, in: Analytic Theology: New Essays in the Philosophy of Theology, Mike C. Rea and Oliver Crisp, eds., 1–30. Oxford University Press.

Rea, Michael ed. 2009. Oxford Readings in Philosophical Theology Volume 1: Trinity, Incarnation, Atonement. Oxford University Press.

Sanches de Oliveira, Guilherme. 2013. “Review – Simulation and Similarity” in Metapsychology Online Reviews 17: http://metapsychology.mentalhelp.net/poc/view_doc.php?type=book&id=6985&cn=394

Soskice, Janet Martin. 1985. Metaphor and Religious Language. Clarendon.

Strevens, Michael. 2007. Depth: An Account of Scientific Explanation. Harvard University Press.

Torrance, T.F. 1988. The Trinitarian Faith. T&T Clark.

Weinandy, Thomas G. 2000. Does God Suffer? University of Notre Dame Press.

Weisberg, Michael. 2013. Simulation and Similarity: Using Models to Understand the World. Oxford University Press.

Wierenga, Edward. 1989. The Nature of God. Cornell University Press.

Williams, Rowan. 2000. On Christian Theology. Blackwell Press.

Williams, Rowan. 2014. The Edge of Words. Bloomsbury.

Wimsatt, William C. 2007. Re-engineering Philosophy for Limited Beings. Harvard University Press.








ISSN 2300-7648 (print)
ISSN 2353-5636 (online)

Partnerzy platformy czasopism