Narrative, Religion and Science: Fundamentalism Versus Irony, 1700–1999

Cambridge University Press (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

An increasing number of contemporary scientists, philosophers and theologians downplay their professional authority and describe their work as simply 'telling stories about the world'. If this is so, Stephen Prickett argues, literary criticism can be applied to all these fields. Such new-found modesty is not necessarily postmodernist scepticism towards all grand narratives, but it often conceals a widespread confusion and naïvety about what 'telling stories', 'description' or 'narrative', actually involves. While postmodernists define 'narrative' in opposition to the experimental 'knowledge' of science, some scientists insist that science is itself story-telling ; certain philosophers and theologians even see all knowledge simply as stories created by language. Yet story telling is neither innocent nor empty-handed. Prickett argues that since the eighteenth century there have been only two possible ways of understanding the world: the fundamentalist, and the ironic.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,297

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-09-10

Downloads
0

6 months
0

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Can a History of Photosynthesis be Grand?Andre M. Hahn - 2016 - Philosophy, Theory, and Practice in Biology 8 (20160629).

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references