Welcome to the InfoSci Platform
Rethinking the Fact-Value Split: A Place for Religion in the Public Square?

Rethinking the Fact-Value Split: A Place for Religion in the Public Square?

R. Scott Smith
Copyright: © 2017 |Pages: 18
ISBN13: 9781522519553|ISBN10: 1522519556|EISBN13: 9781522519560
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-1955-3.ch003
Cite Chapter Cite Chapter

MLA

Smith, R. Scott. "Rethinking the Fact-Value Split: A Place for Religion in the Public Square?." Multiculturalism and the Convergence of Faith and Practical Wisdom in Modern Society, edited by Ana-Maria Pascal, IGI Global, 2017, pp. 63-80. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-1955-3.ch003

APA

Smith, R. S. (2017). Rethinking the Fact-Value Split: A Place for Religion in the Public Square?. In A. Pascal (Ed.), Multiculturalism and the Convergence of Faith and Practical Wisdom in Modern Society (pp. 63-80). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-1955-3.ch003

Chicago

Smith, R. Scott. "Rethinking the Fact-Value Split: A Place for Religion in the Public Square?." In Multiculturalism and the Convergence of Faith and Practical Wisdom in Modern Society, edited by Ana-Maria Pascal, 63-80. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, 2017. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-1955-3.ch003

Export Reference

Mendeley
Favorite

Abstract

Multicultural, western societies are quite secular, and the secular-sacred divide has been shaped by the fact-value split. But, the fact-value split also influences many other cultures, including in Latin and South America and East Asia. On it, science yields knowledge, but religion and ethics yield opinions and values. Closely related is the public-private split: governments should act on public reasons (ones based on science), and not private ones (ones based on religious and ethical views). Such science is methodologically naturalistic, bracketing anything supernatural or non-physical. This science usually presupposes ontological naturalism: what exists is natural, or physical. But, the author will contend the fact-value split is mistaken; on naturalism, humans cannot have knowledge. At best, people only have interpretations, even in science. However, the author also will argue that people can have moral and religious knowledge. If so, there will be many practical implications for public policy and religious practice.

Request Access

You do not own this content. Please login to recommend this title to your institution's librarian or purchase it from the IGI Global bookstore.