How Does Christianity Provide a Foundation for Science?
Photo by Aaron Burden on Unsplash
“Men became scientific because they expected Law in Nature, and they expected Law in Nature because they believed in a Legislator.”
Some people today debate whether or not a person can be a good scientist and still believe in God. But what we really ought to be asking is how a person can do science without believing in the supernatural. The justification for the scientific enterprise can’t come from within science, because science is a tool or method, not a philosophy. The ultimate reason for scientific work must come from a larger worldview, and that justification is rooted more deeply in Christianity than most people recognize.
We can begin to explain why science works by asking: What are the necessary conditions for science? How can we be sure that science is a real road to truth and a worthwhile investment of time, resources, and effort? I propose that there are three major requirements for scientific work, and that a supernatural, theistic worldview best supplies these requirements.
Science requires a universe that operates according to regular laws and discernible patterns.
"Because children have abounding vitality, because they are in spirit fierce and free, therefore they want things repeated and unchanged. They always say, "Do it again"; and the grown-up person does it again until he is nearly dead. For grown-up people are not strong enough to exult in monotony. But perhaps God is strong enough to exult in monotony. It is possible that God says every morning, "Do it again" to the sun; and every evening, "Do it again" to the moon. It may not be automatic necessity that makes all daisies alike; it may be that God makes every daisy separately, but has never got tired of making them. It may be that He has the eternal appetite of infancy; for we have sinned and grown old, and our Father is younger than we. The repetition in Nature may not be a mere recurrence; it may be a theatrical encore."
G. K. Chesterton (Orthodoxy, 1908)
Science begins with the assumption that the universe is predictable; that it works rationally by cause and effect, and past events are a real guide as to what to expect in the future. But why should we believe that the universe has this sort of regularity? The sun came up yesterday and today; but that does not affect whatsoever the probability of it rising tomorrow; to believe it will is an act of faith.
Christianity teaches that God is more than just the creator of the universe; He also sustains it constantly with His creative power. So, the lawfulness of the cosmos is a result of the lawfulness of God (if you’ve ever read Leviticus you know that God is great at laws). The reason many early scientists were Roman Catholics or came from Catholic cultures is that Christianity’s theology is based on a creator who is rational and who created a rational universe to reflect His nature.
Atheists assume the universe operates with regularity because that is just how it appears when we study how it works. But science is the art of teasing out these laws and systems, and perhaps the explanation of their existence ought to be deeper than, “it looks rational, so it is.” To assume the orderliness of the universe without any greater reason to do so is an act of faith; it might be a correct assumption, but to do so while looking down one’s nose at those who do have a philosophical foundation for their beliefs is rude.
Science requires minds that are capable of real insight.
Without belief in some kind of supernatural reality, we can have no confidence that our thoughts (related somehow to electric pulses traveling through squishy grey goop in our skulls) can have any real relationship to truth. As René Descartes famously wondered, how can we be sure that the thoughts in our minds are in any way connected to an external reality? Perhaps we are only bodiless spirits having very long dreams (though it seems odd that we’d dream about root canals or colonoscopies). Perhaps we are living in the Matrix, waiting for Neo to free us.
For science to be useful and fruitful, we need some assurance that what we think is connected to reality. Austin L. Hughes (who was Carolina Distinguished Professor of Biological Sciences at the University of South Carolina) challenged the notion that there is always an evolutionary advantage to knowing what is true. Unless materialists can make a strong case that there is an evolutionary advantage to perceiving truth, scientists cannot justify their confidence in real knowledge on evolutionary grounds. And yet, even if it could be proved there was an evolutionary advantage, a reasonable person would have to concede that many people survive and reproduce who have no firm grasp on reality, and in some cases these people thrive (politicians, for example).
Confidence in our ability to know things must come from someplace other than the material world. Science tells us whether testable things are true or not, within an already-existing framework for understanding truth. But where did that framework come from? For Christians, belief in the reliability of our minds comes from Jesus, whom the book of John calls the Logos, or Word. He is the source of logic and reason.
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made."
John 1:1-3 ESV
We can believe our minds are capable of real insights, grounded in the belief that they are the products of the great mind of God, though our minds are fallen and imperfect, unlike His.
Science requires motivation to do selfless work.
To be a good scientist, it takes hard studying and dedicated work. Higher education is often expensive, and science jobs don’t always pay well. And yet, people continue to work in scientific fields, even when their research will never directly benefit themselves. Climatologists try to preserve the Earth for future generations – even climatologists that don’t have children. Science teachers invest in the next generation even after those teachers are too old to benefit from their students’ advancements and inventions. Astronomers give up their nights to make discoveries that will only serve as a jumping off point for the next generation. Why do they do it?
The motivation to do good work, in science or any other field, is based on beliefs about the way we ought to behave and how to live a good life. But these beliefs cannot come from science, because good science doesn't try to answer these kinds of questions. Why should I care about the next generation? Why should I care about advancing the knowledge of mankind? Why should I care about curing diseases I don’t have or solving problems that don’t directly affect me?
These questions' answers also must be found in philosophy, and I believe they are best answered by Christian philosophy. We should explore and care for God’s creation because He has appointed us stewards over it. We should try to make it a better place, because we have the privilege of participating with God in redemptive works. We should wonder at the beauty of the created order because it reveals and glorifies the one who created it. We should serve humanity through science because people are made in God’s image and He loves them.
There are plenty of scientists who do excellent work without thinking about these questions or answering them with Christianity. But I contend that these scientists, whether they recognize it or not, are working under assumptions that only make sense within a Christian worldview. Theologians have a concept called Common Grace. It means that God has given grace to all of humanity - even those who do not acknowledge Him - to be able to do good things and avoid many kinds of evil. This Common Grace is what allows people to do great work, even when they can't always clearly articulate (or understand) why they do it.
The good work of science
Atheists and other non-Christians can, of course, do great scientific work. They do every day, and currently there are more of them doing it than Christians who are. But they are only capable of doing good science because they are relying on assumptions that originate from a supernatural philosophy. These assumptions have sneaked in through the labyrinth of history and go mostly unnoticed. Christians believe that every person doing scientific work is made in the image of God, and so is capable of knowledge, insight, discovery, and passion about his or her work. Just because the source of these capabilities often goes unrecognized does not mean that God doesn't exist, nor does it mean that He doesn't delight in the work of science.
Christianity lays a solid foundation for science that provides room and reason for discovery and real knowledge, and the Church has produced many great scientists. Atheists can't ultimately justify why they work in science, or why they think it reveals truth. That's fine. As long as they keep doing good scientific work, they can benefit humanity and serve God's purposes despite themselves.
For scientists who are Christians, recognizing the foundation of their work provides a sense of purpose and satisfaction. Science is good and joyful work.
Christians also have a story that deals with the imperfect nature of science and scientists. Sometimes experiments go wrong. Sometimes scientists do unethical things. Sometimes people use scientific knowledge for awful purposes. It must be discouraging for the Atheist, who sees science as the only real path to truth, to see it contaminated and imperfect. But the Christian expects that sort of thing from fallen humans, and trusts that God is restoring creation and will someday right every wrong and correct every error. Science, like everything else, is in the process of being redeemed. But science, like everything good, finds its source in God.