Skip to main content

Peter Harrison

The University of Queensland, Australia, Faculty of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences, Emeritus

University of Notre Dame (Australia), Office of the PVC Research, Faculty Member

Followers

1,175

Following

109

Co-authors

3

Public Views

InterestsView All (6)

Uploads

Papers by Peter Harrison

Harrison Response to Critics PTSc

Philosophy, Theology and the Sciences, 2025

In this article I address my commentators' questions about the implications of the thesis set out... more In this article I address my commentators' questions about the implications of the thesis set out in Some New World. I suggest that the book is not just another decline narrative, since on my view secular modernity is attended by gains and losses, and that in any case what counts as decline is in the eye of the beholder. The response also explores whether Christianity has some enduring essence that serves as a clear criterion for which of its historical manifestations are to be regarded as legitimate. In response to the question of whether we need a non-naturalistic science, I argue that the present conduct of science is fine, provided that we limit our expectations of what it can deliver and realise that its putative naturalism can be re-described as a particular version of theism. At the same time, I suggest that there may be a way forward that "overcomes" the present and historically contingent binary between natural and supernatural that provides the basis for modern naturalism (and to some extent, denials of naturalism, too). This, however, would involve something like a Hegelian 'sublation' or a paradigmatic revolution.

The Birth of Naturalism

Aeon, 2025

This essay traces the origins of contemporary scientific naturalism to the late nineteenth centur... more This essay traces the origins of contemporary scientific naturalism to the late nineteenth century, and contests the standard histories of naturalism that trace it back to the presocratic philosophers of ancient Greece. It proposes that naturalism is actually indebted to a version of monotheism, and also shows how our modern natural-supernaral distinciton is historically recent and specific to the West.

Why religion is not going away and science will not destroy it

Aeon , 2017

It was once predicted that religion was destined to die out across the globe, with traditional co... more It was once predicted that religion was destined to die out across the globe, with traditional commitments to the supernatural being inevitably replaced by a secular, scientific worldview. Recent years, however, have seen a signficant return of religion, suggesting that standard models of secularization are deeply flawed.

A Fuller Vision of "After Science and Religion"

Philosophy, Theology and the Sciences, 2025

This conversation outlines the goals and parameters of the "After Science and Religion" project w... more This conversation outlines the goals and parameters of the "After Science and Religion" project with one of its organizers, Peter Harrison. Harrison considers the major aspiration of the project to bring more theological voices into the field. He insists on the capaciousness of the project both in the sense of discipline (it includes theologians, historians, and scientists) and in the sense of viewpoint (many contributors disagree about the relation between scientism and science and in their evaluation of naturalism). The future of the field of science and religion, particularly in the wake of Harrison's The Territories of Science and Religion, is discussed. "After Science and Religion" is brought into conversation with science-engaged theology and theology of science as paths forward. Finally, the relationship between radical orthodoxy and the project is clarified.

Original Sin and the Problem of Knowledge in Early Modern Europe

Journal of the History of Ideas, 2002

The Forgotten Proof: The Existence of God and Universal Consent

The Journal of Religion, 2024

During the early modern period the proof of God’s existence based on universal consent (consensus... more During the early modern period the proof of God’s existence based on universal consent (consensus gentium) was widely regarded as the most powerful argument that could be deployed against atheism. Yet from the mid-eighteenth century the argument began to disappear from the roster of arguments for God’s existence. Modern readers, moreover, find it difficult to see what makes this a proof at all and wonder why it was ever thought to be persuasive. This article offers a history of the consensus gentium principle, showing why it was long regarded as logically compelling, and explaining its relation to the three better-known ‘classical’ proofs of God’s existence. Consideration of the varying fortunes of this argument yields important insights into the changing nature and status of proofs for God’s existence and especially how these changed during the early modern period. It also shows why the burden of proof has gradually shifted over the past four centuries so that it is now belief in God rather than atheism that is thought to require rational justification. The history of this argument thus sheds light on the emergence of a distinctive feature of secular modernity, in which belief in the existence of God has become just one possibility among others. The article concludes with a brief consideration of modern vestiges of the argument in Rudolf Otto’s sense of the numinous, in revivals of Reidian reliabilism associated with reformed epistemology, and in the work of some practitioners of the cognitive science of religion.

REVIEW OF PAUL TYSON, A CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY OF SCIENCE

Modern Theology, 2024

I was delighted to see Paul Tyson's A Christian Theology of Science appear in print. By way of fu... more I was delighted to see Paul Tyson's A Christian Theology of Science appear in print. By way of full disclosure, I was in the fortunate position of watching the book take shape in real time and to have had (at times, lively) discussions with its author about its central claims. Like any stimulating new work that seeks to lay out a new agenda, the book not only articulates a bold thesis, but at the same time raises a host of new questions. What follows is a brief summary of the book's argument as I understand it, followed by some of the questions I was left with having completed it. These mostly concern the overall framing device of the book-what Tyson refers to as 'the first truth discourses' of science and theology. A second, and relatively brief set of questions is to do with what follows from Tyson's analysis for our evaluation and understanding of modern science. A Christian Theology of Science is part of a relatively new and (literally) unapologetic trend to relocate the science-theology discussion into the heart of Christian theology. 1 The central argument of the book is that modern science embodies a worldview that is incompatible with, and indeed opposed to, a genuinely Christian worldview. Tyson speaks in this context of the 'first truth discourse of science' which he opposes to 'the first truth discourse of Christianity' (1-3). The historical thesis is that in the West, from the seventeenth century onwards, the latter was gradually displaced by the former. Tyson identifies the first truth discourse of science with a form of reductive materialism (24-25), while the first truth discourse of Christianity entails belief in doctrinal propositions that coincide broadly with traditional symbols of faith such as the Apostle's Creed (12, 110). The normative thesis is that unless we recognize the implicit tension between these competing discourses, any attempt to understand the relationship between science and religion is doomed to failure. Tyson argues that this is true for most of such efforts since the nineteenth century: these are variously categorized as 'adaptation', 'withdrawal', and 'appropriation' (5-7, cf. 83-88). Adaptation,

The History of Science and Theology

St Andrew Encyclopaedia of Theology, 2022

This entry offers a history of the different ways in which the formal study of the natural world ... more This entry offers a history of the different ways in which the formal study of the natural world has been related to theological considerations in the Western Christian tradition. Because what counts as science and what counts as theology has changed over time, it begins with a history of the concepts 'theology' and 'science' and the bearing of these conceptual shifts on their relationship. This is followed by a general account of the kinds of relations obtained between science and theology in different periods from antiquity to the present. A final section deals with three recurring issues that also exemplify some general principles.

NORMATIVITY AND THE CRITICAL FUNCTIONS OF GENEALOGY: THE CASE OF MODERN SCIENCE 1

Modern Theology, 2023

The first part of this article offers some general remarks about genealogical approaches to histo... more The first part of this article offers some general remarks about genealogical approaches to history, focusing on historical narratives that stress the role played by theological considerations in the formation of aspects of secular modernity. A central question is whether such genealogies can serve to critique the present without drawing upon contestable moral or religious commitments. I suggest that genealogies fulfil this function when they identify inconsistencies in putatively neutral or secular stances by revealing how their coherence ultimately relies upon unacknowledged theological foundations.

Science and Religion as Historical Traditions

After Science and Religion, 2022

2016 saw the publication of Science and Religion: An Impossible Dialogue by French-Canadian socio... more 2016 saw the publication of Science and Religion: An Impossible Dialogue by French-Canadian sociologist Yves Gingras. 1 The book, it must said, does not constitute a particularly helpful intervention, and against the grain of virtually all recent scholarship presents a reactionary reassertion of the discredited notion of an enduring historical conflict between science and religion. 2 But it does offer an interesting challenge, evident in its title, in that it enquires after the conditions of possibility for a dialogue between science and religion, and raises the normative issue of whether such a dialogue is desirable. By way of contrast, much contemporary science-religion discussion has tended to assume, to some degree uncritically, both the possibility and desirability of dialogue between science and religion. 3 This chapter begins with the question posed by Gingras's book, asking what must be true of 'science' and 'religion' for dialogue between them to be possible. One obvious response to this question is that they must in some sense be commensurable: that is, be the kinds of entities that can be in conversation with each other. My suggestion will be the understanding them in these terms can perpetuate an illicit reification in which they come to be understood primarily as enterprises that deliver propositions about the world. The chapter explores two main alternatives: science and religion as formative practices; and science and religion as historical traditions. The latter argument proceeds by way of a discussion of the problem of incommensurability, and potential solutions to it. In both cases, some form of historically informed philosophy turns out to be vital for an understanding of the relations between science and religion.

The religious enlightenment. Protestants, Jews, and Catholics from London to Vienna. By David Sorkin. (Jews, Christians, and Muslims from the Ancient to the Modern World.) Pp. xvii+339 incl. 6 figs and 6 maps. Princeton–Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2008. £19.95 ($35). 978 0 691 13502 1

The Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 2010

Science, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Protestantism

Isis, 2016

This essay considers some of the major theological differences between Eastern and Western tradit... more This essay considers some of the major theological differences between Eastern and Western traditions of Christianity and puts forward proposals about how these might be related to the divergent trajectories of the formal study of nature in these two cultural contexts. A key difference lies in the "other-worldly" orientation of Eastern Orthodoxy and its emphasis on deification, which contrast sharply with ideas of original sin and fall-redemption theology in the West. These latter ideas came to play a significant role in the rise of Western science, with the sciences being understood as part of a practical redemptive exercise that could help alleviate the material consequences of original sin.

What is Natural Theology? (And Should We Dispense with It

Zygon, 2022

In a series of impressive works, Alister McGrath has made a major contribution to contemporary na... more In a series of impressive works, Alister McGrath has made a major contribution to contemporary natural theology. The natural theology he has in mind is not the "established" variety, which seeks to provide rational support for religious beliefs from nonreligious premises. Rather, it is an explicitly Christian natural theology that involves "seeing" the world through the lens of Christian revelation. Nevertheless, McGrath seems to hold that a sufficiently capacious understanding of natural theology can encompass both the established version and the broader vision that constitutes his own project. This article suggests that there is a significant tension between these two conceptions of natural theology. It argues that the supposedly "established" version of natural theology was never really established within the Christian tradition to any significant degree but was instead belatedly projected onto it for various reasons. The historical tradition comports with McGrath's project, but not with his generous comprehension of the established conception within a genuinely Christian natural theology.

Defining and Defending the Humanities

Zygon, 2021

The year 1667 saw the publication of the History of the Royal Society, a work produced by the pre... more The year 1667 saw the publication of the History of the Royal Society, a work produced by the prelate and preacher Thomas Sprat. Given that the Society first met in 1660 and had only received a formal Royal Charter and its official name in 1663, writing its history at this early juncture might seem to have been a little premature. Close consultation of Sprat's History, however, reveals that its true purpose was less to provide a chronological account of the founding and activities of the Society than to offer an apologetic defence of its methods and potential accomplishments. The fact that its author was better known for his literary abilities than his scientific achievements offers a further clue to the work's true purpose: it was a public relations exercise. Sprat's History was intended to help establish the legitimacy of a scientific enterprise that was considered by many to be politically suspect and of dubious social utility. Many of Sprat's contemporaries held that literary, theological, philosophical, philological, moral, and historical pursuits-activities that we would now classify among the humanities-was where the real action lay. By way of contrast, the new-fangled experimental sciences seemed to aim at crudely utilitarian goals and, even then, were judged to have been unsuccessful in accomplishing them.

Naturalism and the Success of Science

Religious Studies, 2020

Methodological naturalism is usually regarded as compatible with a range of religious commitments... more Methodological naturalism is usually regarded as compatible with a range of religious commitments on the part of scientific practitioners and it is typically assumed that methodological naturalism does not imply metaphysical naturalism. Against this, it has been argued that the cumulative success of the sciences, conducted in conformity with the principle of methodological naturalism, actually provides compelling evidence for the truth of metaphysical naturalism. In this paper I assess the argument for naturalism from the history of science and suggest that it is deficient in a number of ways. There may be reasons for adopting naturalism, but the history of science is not the place to look for them.

The Paradox of Western Values

The phrase ‘Western values’ calls to mind a long moral tradition dating back to classical antiqui... more The phrase ‘Western values’ calls to mind a long moral tradition dating back to classical antiquity—the thought of the ancient Greeks, the traditions of Roman law, New Testament moral ideals. But the idea that there are such things as ‘Western values’ cannot be found in any of these traditions themselves. The specific concept of ‘Western values’ is not itself part of the tradition to which it putatively refers. In fact, no-one ever thought there was such a thing as ‘Western values’ until the middle decades of the last century. The relative novelty of the idea of Western values is attributable to two factors. First, talk about moral or cultural values turns out to be a historically recent phenomenon. The expression ‘moral values’ was not in use before the middle of the mid-nineteenth century. Second, and turning to the other component of our dual expression, the idea of ‘the West’—in the sense that Western values evokes—is also historically recent. Ironically, for much of its history Europe sought to define its identity by drawing upon cultural norms and traditions that lay beyond its own geographical boundaries. ‘The West’ is not an idea that those now regarded as instantiating it ever had about themselves.

From Conflict to Dialogue and All the Way Back. Review of Yves Gingras, 'Science and Religion: An Impossible Dialogue'

'I BELIEVE BECAUSE IT IS ABSURD': THE ENLIGHTENMENT INVENTION OF TERTULLIAN'S CREDO

Tertullian is widely regarded as having originated the expression Credo quia absurdum (est) (I be... more Tertullian is widely regarded as having originated the expression Credo quia absurdum (est) (I believe because it is absurd) and the phrase often appears in contemporary polemics about the rationality of religious belief. Patristic scholars have long pointed out that Tertullian never said this or meant anything like it. However, little scholarly attention has been paid to the circumstances in which this specific phrase came into existence and why, in spite of its dubious provenance, it continues to be regarded by many as a legitimate characterization of religious faith. This paper shows how Tertullian's original expression— " It is certain, because impossible " —was first misrepresented and modified in the early modern period. In seventeenth century England a " credo " version—I believe because it is impossible— became the common form of Tertullian's maxim. A further modification, building on the first, was effected by the Enlightenment philosophe Voltaire, who added the " absurdity condition " and gave us the modern version of the paradox: I believe because it is absurd. These modifications played a significant role in Enlightenment representations of religion as irrational, and signal the beginning of a new understanding of faith as an epistemic vice. This doubtful maxim continues to play a role in debates about the cognitive status of religious faith, and its failure to succumb to the historical evidence against it is owing to its ongoing rhetorical usefulness in such debates The North African Church Father Tertullian (c.160-c.225) has the misfortune to be best remembered for something he never said: Credo quia absurdum (est)—I believe because it is absurd. This maxim makes a routine appearance in a wide variety of contemporary contexts: philosophical assessments of the rationality of religious belief, accounts of the putative conflict between science and religion, dictionaries and handbooks, histories of Western thought, and discussions of different theological approaches to knowledge. Almost invariably, Tertullian is depicted as the personification of a regrettable religious anti-rationalism. Patristic scholars have long pointed out that Tertullian said something rather different to the saying typically credited to him. He did not think that the absurdity of a proposition provided a justification for believing it, and almost certainly thought that faith should be supported by reason. Yet the maxim 'I believe because it is absurd' continues to have a life as the one thing that well-read people know about this early Christian writer. This paper is not primarily an attempt to set the record straight, although it will briefly consider the original context of Tertullian's paradox and what he meant by it. Its main purpose is to establish when the expression came to be changed from its original form

NARRATIVES OF SECULARIZATION: INTRODUCTION

Introduction to special issue of Intellectual History Review, 27/1 (2017). With contributions fr... more

Science And Secularization

According to a long-standing narrative of Western modernity science is one of the main drivers of... more According to a long-standing narrative of Western modernity science is one of the main drivers of secularization. Science is said to have generated challenges to core religious beliefs and to have provided an alternative, rational way of looking at the world. This narrative typically relies on progressive and teleological understandings of history, and commitment to some version of an ongoing struggle between science and religion. By way of contrast, recent theories of secularization, such as that of Charles Taylor, have suggested that the role of science in secularization has been greatly exaggerated. This article also offers a critique of the standard “science causes secularization” story. But in contrast to other critiques of this kind, it suggests that science nonetheless has a significant role in secularization—one that can be maintained without a commitment to a crude progressivist history or a narrative of science-religion conflict.