You may be interested in:
Workshop: Epistemological Analysis of the Science-Religion Dialogue
The difficult epistemological relationship between science and religion
Pamplona, 9 and 10 November 2016
University of Navarra, classroom 30 Central Building
Christián Carman (National University of Quilmes / CONICET)
Respondent: Santiago Collado (University of Navarra, Ecclesiastical School of Philosophy, CRYF)
summary:exhibition the contemporary debate on scientific realism in light of the acceptance of evolution as a fact.
Ricard Casadesús (Faculty of Philosophy, Ramon Llull University)
Answered by: Daniel Blanco (Universidad Nacional del Litoral, Santa Fe, Argentina)
summaryThe aim is to provide a synthesis of cosmic evolution and biological evolution, as well as a scientific description and philosophical reflection on the various theories that attempt to explain them.
Oscar Beltrán (Pontifical Catholic University of Argentina, School of Humanities and Social Sciences)
Respondent: Francisco Gallardo (University of Navarra, Ecclesiastical School of Philosophy, CRYF)
summary: An examination of consonance: the spontaneous convergence of conclusions drawn by science and theology regarding the characteristics or properties of the universe.
Enrique Moros (University of Navarra, Ecclesiastical School of Philosophy, CRYF)
Respondent: Gonzalo Luis Recio (National University of Quilmes, department Social Sciences)
summary: Aristotle distinguishes philosophy from other fields of knowledge and attempts to describe the progress of philosophy. The former is insufficient and complicates the relationship between science and faith. The latter reveals that, for naturalists, reality is nothing more than appearances. It concludes with a discussion naturalism in Plantinga.
Gonzalo Luis Recio (National University of Quilmes, department Social Sciences)
Respondent: Jorge Martín Montoya (University of Navarra, Ecclesiastical School of Philosophy, CRYF)
summary: Duhem argued that the Ptolemaic explanation was merely instrumental and placed Galileo’s detractors within this tradition. The discussion centers on whether Ptolemy was an instrumentalist and how Ptolemaic models contrasted with Aristotelian physics.
Ignacio del Carril ( Austral University, Institute of Philosophy)
Respondent: Rubén Herce (University of Navarra, Ecclesiastical School of Philosophy, CRYF)
summary: Pascual Jordan (1902–1980) played a key role in the birth of quantum physics. He addresses three problems that science posed to religion: an infinite universe without a creator, the mechanical view of nature, and Darwin’s theory. Mechanism and Jordan’s response are examined, and some insights into realism in science are drawn.
José V. Orón (University of Navarra, ICS, group )
Respondent: Javier Sánchez-Cañizares (University of Navarra, Ecclesiastical School of Philosophy, CRYF)
summary: This paper illustrates how various areas of knowledge the presence of an extra-systemic reality that gives them meaning: knowledge “extra-system” is necessary to understand any explanatory system.
Daniel Blanco (National University of Litoral, Santa Fe, Argentina)
Reply: Antonio Pardo (University of Navarra, School of Medicine, CRYF)
summaryIn the 19th century, three objections to the antiquity of the Earth were raised that coincided in shortening its history. This concordance proved to be false and posed difficulties for scientific realism. It is sample that, however convincing it may sound, it cannot be used to ensure the truth of theories.
