I began preparing for my first Oxford seminar on science and religion with a fairly ordinary task. Dr Shaun Henson’s reading list asked us to assess typological approaches, compare their strengths and weaknesses, and consider alternatives of our own. Ian Barbour’s familiar categories—conflict, independence, dialogue and integration—provided the starting point. I expected to read the arguments, decide which framework seemed most convincing, and arrive ready to discuss it.

Instead, I kept interrupting the preparation with a question that seemed more…
Continue reading →