Edward Hallet Carrs Arguments In What Is History?

Edward Hallet Carrs Arguments In What Is History? Introduction This essay attempts to review Edward Hallet Carrs (1892-1982) arguments in his book What is History? According to Carr, history is a continual process of interaction; a dialogue between the historian in the present and the facts of the past and the relative weight of individuals and social elements on both sides of the equation. Advocating the adoption of a suitable philosophy to the approach of writing history, in terms of selecting, distinguishing and interpreting historical fact, Carr elucidates that great history is written when the historians view of the past is illuminated by insights into the conditions of the present. In addition to continually asking why, the historian also needs to project into the future. This essay attempts to understand Carrs views on objectivity, truth and narrative in the arguments put forth in his book What is History? and the assessment of his arguments by other historians. H.E. Carrs Arguments on What is History In his arguments on What is History? Carr sets out the following premise. History is a continual dialogue between the past and the present; an interaction between the historian and his facts. Establishing the criteria for selecting historical fact, Carr argues that fact itself is insufficient and must be correctly and truthfully interpreted. To arrive at a correct interpretation and factual account of history, a historian must continually question why and whither, as history in essence is change. Carr also underlines the fact that historians, as individuals, cannot be divested from the society they live in. A proper philosophy to the approach of history is thus essential for the historian. Each era or century has its own interpretation of what history is. As a social process, history is an interaction between the past and the present and between the society of today and yesterday. History according to Carr contains a corpus of ascertained facts and these are available to the historian in documents. He however asserts that fact without accurate interpretation is ineffectual. To understand this, one has to first distinguish historical fact from other facts in the past. Carr discusses historical fact in light of the Empirical or Common Sense View of History. There are certain basic facts that are the same for all historians and which form the backbone of history. These facts, however, form the raw material for the historian, rather than history itself. The necessity to verify the truth of these basic facts rests on a priori decision by the historian. Whilst accuracy of such facts is a necessary, a historian must also rely on the auxiliary sciences of history archaeology, epigraphy, numismatics, chronology amongst others. A historian like any other scientist must continually ask the question why. The question whither also assumes importance, since the line of demarcation between pre-historic and historical times is eclipsed when people cease to live only in the present and become consciously interested in their past and future. However, Carr also reveals that as a social being the historian is naturally and inclined to be selective of the facts he chooses. Our picture of the past has been preselected and predetermined for us by people who consciously or unconsciously imbued a particular view and saw those facts as worthy of preserving. Carr likens history to an enormous jigsaw puzzle with many missing parts. A lacunae in the historical facts of 5th century Greece B.C has arisen due to one sided view of Greece from the Athenian citizen. Hardly any information is available on how it looked to other citizens like the Spartan, Corinthian, Theban or even a slave. The 19th century fetishism of facts was complemented by an equal fetishism for documents. However, none of this means anything unless the author has actually deciphered and processed the facts found in these documents before making use of them. Carr defines the method the historian makes use of facts as the processing process. The Stresemanns Vermà ¤ch tnis volume is one such illustration of the selectiveness of historians. Sometimes mere fact about the past is transformed into history. For example while the Battle of Hastings 1066 is an important historical event, it is the historian who decides the whether the inclusion of Caesars crossing of the Rubicon is a relevant historical fact. Or the mention of the murder of a ginger bread vendor at Stalybridge Wakes in 1850 is equally relevant. Their status as historical facts will depend on their interpretation. Correct and truthful interpretation of historical fact is equally important stresses Carr. Facts are like fish swimming about in a vast and sometimes inaccessible ocean. What the historian catches will depend largely on which part of the ocean he is fishing and what fish he intends to catch. The ancient or mediaeval historian may be grateful for the large winnowing process which has over the years put a manageable corpus of facts at their disposal. The modern historian on the other hand has the dual task of discovering a few significant facts and discarding the insignificant ones as unhistorical. Each historian belongs to his own age and is bound to it by the conditions of human existence. An understanding of the past can be achieved by an insight into present conditions. The choice of words for example democracy, empire or war, are connotations linked to the historians specific time in history. Similarly, over the years, a change in the balance of power, world wars and other movements have also influenced historical writing. French history in the latter twentieth century was deeply affected by the Russian Revolution of 1917. Carr advises historians that equal importance should be given to the date and publication of writing as the name of the author when commencing on a study. Carr states it is imperative that the author should neither dwell solely on the past nor disassociate totally from it, but master and understands it, as the key to understanding the present. The reconstitution of the past in the historians mind is dependent on empirical evidence, but is not in itself an empirical process as facts do not speak for themselves. The process of reconstitution governs the selection and interpretation of facts. This indeed is what makes them historical facts. The facts of history are never handed down to us in a pure form clarifies Carr. They are always refracted through the mind of the recorder. When a historian takes up a work of history, the authors first concern should not be with the facts, but rather an understanding of the historians who wrote it and their back ground. To appreciate the work of the English Liberal Historian, Trevelyan England under Queen Anne, one must interpret it against the background of his traditional Whig historian lineage. To appreciate the thoughts behind peoples action, Carr exhorts historian to cultivate an imaginative understanding of the minds of people they are dealing with for a correct interpretation of historical fact. Historians must necessarily cultivate an objective approach to history asserts Carr. The duty of the historian to respect fact cannot be overshadowed by the obligation to see that the facts are accurate. The historian must seek to bring into the picture all known or knowable facts, relevant in one sense or the other to the theme and the interpretation proposed. History is meaningless in a static world affirms Carr. History in its essence is change reveals Carr. It is meaningless in a static world. A society which loses its belief in its capacity to move into the future will quickly cease to concern itself with its progress in the past. History can be accurately written by those who find and accept a sense of direction in history itself. Whilst writing history, two processes must go hand in hand input and output, states Carr. Working historians must stop and reflect what they are doing. The historian can thus effectively mould facts to his interpretation. Speaking from his own experience, Carr reveals that the process of reading and writing are simultaneous exercises for him. The writing is added to and subtracted from as he goes along. He found that his reading was more guided and directed by the writing as he went along. Assessment of Carrs Arguments Since its publication in 1961 E.H. Carrs What is History? the book established itself as a classic reference on the subject.  [1]  Yet despite its widespread recognition, many inner flaws and contradictions have surfaced, sparking several debates on Carr supposition of What is History? Whilst rejecting the crude and rigid re-constructionist stance of the empiricist, Carr as a political constructionist historian has failed to visualise the post modern challenge to the distinction between fact and fiction in historical narrative and the influence of root metaphors.  [2]  His epistemological position is revealed through his scepticism about the nature and status of historical knowledge and sociology of knowledge. (Alan Munslow). Over the years there have been disagreements about Carrs contribution to the analytical philosophy of history, shadowing the distinction between re-constructionism and constructionism.  [3]   Authors Anders Stephanson and Rendall Germain in their appraisal conclude that Carrs answers to the questions he has set about history are in themselves unsatisfactory. Another writer, Keith Jenkins underlines the futility of Carrs empirical-analytical concept particularly in light of the post modern challenges.  [4]  Carr devalues his currency of re-constructionist theory, by his ultimate acceptance of the epistemological model of historical explanation as the best method to create and evaluate historical thought.  [5]   Exploring Carrs epistemological claim to radicalism and his insistence that a historian cannot divorce himself from the outlook and interests of his age, Historian Alan Munslow, highlights the fact that today with greater awareness of the weakness of representation, reference and inductive inference, a larger part of historical writing is based on the supposition that we cannot know any absolute truths about the past. Whilst acknowledging Carrs attention to the discursive nature of historical facts, Historian Alex Callinicos refutes Carrs opinion that the importance of empirical evidence diminishes since the facts of history are refracted through the mind of the historian.  [6]  Rather this premise gives rise to the question of the historians subjective bearing on the facts. Carr drops his objectivist anchor when he argues that Historian Collingwoods logic of sceptical position leads to the idea that there is no certainty in historical meaning and that the discourses of historians, or what Carr termed as total scepticism, like something spun out a human brain, suggests that there could be no objective truth in historical writing.  [7]  Supporting his own belief in the power of empiricism, Carrexplicitly rejected Nietzches notion that historical truth is defined by fitness of purpose. This misguiding percept excludes the possibility that one interpretation is as good as another.  [8]   While confirming the necessity of a continual interaction between the historian and his facts, Carr was unwilling to acknowledge that the written historical fact could possibly be a work of fiction.  [9]  He overlooks the reality that new evidence and new theory can offer new interpretations. Carrs epistemological theory of knowledge argues that the past is known from its evidence and remains so whilst being introduced in the historical narrative.  [10]   For example, Carrs argument that facts are a priori decision of the historian, and that the historians influence on and the arrangement of these facts is what constitutes historical meaning. However, this gives rise to the risk of subjectivity and the outcome may not be an accurate representation of the evidence.  [11]   Carr pulls back from relativism which his own logic has thrust him into. Aware that he is running a post empiricist wind, he rejects Collingwoods demand for the emphatic and constructive approach and cites another historian who accepts the model of dialogue between past and present, while keeping an objective point of view. This profile of a historian is affirmed by the American Commentators Joyce Appleby, Lynn Hunt and Margaret Jacob who repacked Carrs position as practical realism.  [12]   Carr uses his objectivist angle to underplay the problems of historical form.  [13]  He does this by arguing that the standard for objectivity in history is the historians sense of the direction in history, which means the historian selects facts not on personal bias, but on the ability to choose the right facts, or, in other words, that he applies the right standard of significance.  [14]   Carrs objective historian is one who has the ability to see beyond the inadequate vision of his own position in society and history and at the same time has the ability to visualise the future to give him a more in depth and enduring understanding of the past.  [15]   The objective historian is also one who penetrates most deeply into the mutual method of fact and value, who recognises that facts and values are not necessarily in opposition to differences in standards emerging from disparity of historical fact, and vice versa. An objective historian also understands the boundaries of historical theory. Carrs insists that the objective historian should develop the habit of reading and interpreting the evidence at the same time. However, appropriate social theory precludes presumption or series of connected presumptions, of how people in the past acted intentionally and related to their social contexts.  [16]   Conclusion In his book What is History? H E Carr lays out the premises for conducting a correct approach and philosophy to writing history. History according to Carr is a continuous dialogue between the past and present and a continual interaction between the historian and the facts, for a correct interpretation and accurate recording of facts. It is constantly changing. It is important therefore for the historian to develop a proper philosophy of history before undertaking a study, where historical fact, the criteria for selection of, and their factual interpretation are of vital importance. Carrs arguments about objectivity and his epistemological theory of knowledge have been widely criticised by empiricist as well as the social theory historians. His failure to visualise post modern challenge to the distinction between fact and fiction in historical narrative and his inclination towards post-empiricism despite his claims to radicalism have reduced the currency of his re-constructionist theory.

macbeth :: essays research papers

Shakespeare draws an amazing psychological portrait of a man who became a villain by means of ambition, desire and an imbalance of good and evil. â€Å"Macbeth† is a play composed of the disintegration of a noble man’s world. The play begins by offering the audience Macbeth, a war hero, with a high regard from Duncan, the king of Scotland. By the end of the play Macbeth transforms into a universally despised man without a place in the social community. Shakespeare draws an amazing face of a man made to be a villain by ambition, desire and an imbalance of good and evil.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Macbeth, unhappy and unsatisfied with his social position, caused his feelings to snowball into the ambition that led him to the murder of Duncan.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã¢â‚¬Å"I have no spur To prick the sides of my intent, but only Vaulting ambition, which O’erleaps itself And falls on th’other† (Act 1 sc. 7 pg 41) By using an aside, Shakespeare allows Macbeth to reveal his ambitions. And uses Macbeth’s ambition to create irony, in that his ambition was what brought him to power, yet it also leads him to his tragic downfall. Ambition is what allowed Macbeth to become more powerful, and helps him to overcome obstacles and come closer to his final goals. It is this ambition that is the direct cause of the tragic incident of Duncan’s death.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The encounter with the three witches summons Macbeth’s innermost imaginative desires, eventually pointing him in the direction of Duncan’s murder.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã¢â‚¬Å"Art thou not fatal vision, sensible To feeling as to sight? Or art thou but A dagger of the mind, a false creation Proceeding from the heat-oppressed brain?† (Act 2 sc. 1 pg 53)  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Here Macbeth’s imagination precedes his rational thought, he is stolen in the grip of his fantastical imagination. It is as if the dagger is actually pulling him towards his desires to murder Duncan, rather than being persuaded by an actual inner passion for that motive. Shakespeare uses this scene to demonstrate to the audience that Macbeth’s conscious act of knowing that his desires are immoral and still acting upon them proves him quite the villain. This symbolism brings the audience to savor the play’s hidden meanings and also allows for leeway in the interpretation of the plot.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Macbeth’s inability to balance the forces of good and evil cause him to reach an insecure state of mind, causing him to make many malicious decisions.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã¢â‚¬Å"But let the fame of things disjoint, both the worlds suffer,

Monsoosn

Monsoosn is a typical seasonal wind in low altitude climate that changes direction between winter and summer season. Monsoon wind typically flow from the geographical land in winter season carrying cool dry air (dry phase), and to the land in summer carrying warm moist air (wet phase), causing a sweeping change in the rain and temperature patterns of the area.The â€Å"monsoon† word is derived from the Arabic word mausim, meaning changing season. Initially the word monsoon was used to describe winds in the Arabian Sea, but with the passage of time it is employed for seasonally changing wind systems all over the world. The difference in the heating of land and water surface results in pressure difference between land and ocean. (Roger G. Barry, Richard J. Chorley, 1998)In the winter to maintain the energy balance between land and water heat is transferred by land- sea breezes. This pressure difference gives rise to monsoon. In winter season the air over the land area is colder than over the oceans, generating a large high pressure area over the Siberia, leading to air movement across the Indian Ocean and South China, causing clear skies for South Asia and East. While the exact opposite phenomenon occurs in summer.In summer monsoon of Southwest Asia wind starts blowing from the ocean the continent with wet shower patterns. The air over the continents land is much warmer than over the oceans, resulting in moisture laden wind movement from the ocean towards the continent. When this humidified air unites with comparatively dry west air flow crossing over the mountains, it starts rising till reaches its saturation point with the development of heavy showers and thunderstorms. (Roger G. Barry, Richard J. Chorley, 1998)The most prominent pattern of monsoon system is seen in eastern and southern Asia; however it has also been prevailing in Australia, West Africa and the Pacific Ocean. A small scale monsoonal system exists in the southern United States called Nort h American, Mexican or Arizona Monsoon. Between July and September the North American monsoon is circulating over southwest North America bringing remarkable increase in rain showers in normally arid regions of Arizona, New Mexico and northwestern Mexico. The west or northwest winds with similarities to the original Southwest Asian monsoon turn more south or southwest having monsoonal circulation brings moisture from Pacific Ocean, Gulf of California and Gulf of Maxico.The monsoon is an important aspect of atmospheric circulation. It brings humid air from over the oceans traveling across the land to the mountains being lifted up due to day time heating from the sun, finally causing thunderstorm and turning out into rain over the land. The large areas in the tropics and subtropics are under the influence of monsoons. In highly populated areas of the world like Asia or India, the monsoon is vital for agriculture for harvesting land and thus the food production. From time to time a str ong monsoon circulation has been seen bringing flood or if the monsoon is late in a specific year, it has been seen causing droughts.A very interesting phenomenon similar to monsoon occurs in smaller spatial and temporal scale, the mountain and valley breezes. The reason behind their occurrence is the same as that of monsoon. During the day the valley and area around it becomes warm heating the air from scorching sun which makes it less dense with a propensity to rise and a gentle upslope wind occurs.This upslope valley wind if carry enough humidity may cause showers and even thunderstorms in warmest part of the day or early afternoon. Exactly opposite to this phenomenon at night slopes cool down quickly causing the air around to cool and blow down from the mountain to the valley forming some sort of gravity wind named mountain breeze. Technically speaking nay kind of down slope wind is called Katabatic or fall wind which is best used for considerably stronger wind than mountain bre eze. (Peter Combs, 2000)The monsoon season prevails from June to September, and is liable for widespread rain leading to flooding across India and Bangladesh. This is a very common phenomenon in this region of world happening time and again. Noticeable monsoon effects are recorded in the history of meteorological study in past.Bangladesh is a low-lying, poor nation of 144 million people, where seasonal floods and cyclones due to monsoon kill hundreds every year. A powerful cyclone in 1991 killed 139,000 people along the coast with a record worst in a decade monsoon rains. (Peter Combs, 2000)In June 2007 heavy rains swept across southern India’s Karnataka state western Maharashtra state killing 38 people. This sweep had also caused flooding and wild storms that had hit also the neighboring Pakistan where 228 people were killed in a week.â€Å"Hundreds of people died last year in South Asia in floods and landslides which are common during the monsoon season. But officials in I ndian and Bangladesh say that this year's flooding is the worst they have seen in over a decade. â€Å"Some 400,000 houses were damaged in floods in 18 of the state's 24 districts,† the chief minister of the Indian state of Assam, Tarun Gogoi, told AFP news agency†. â€Å"Flood waters are continuing to rise in Bangladesh and eastern India, swamping large stretches of land and affecting millions of people.† http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/On August 23 in 2005 hurricane Katrina had developed. It was the one of the five deadliest hurricanes in the history of the United States. Atlantic monsoon season had brought damage in a large extent of the north-central Gulf Coast. Severe loss of life and property had occurred in New Orleans, Louisiana due to flooding of vast area. The hurricane caused much more devastating destruction across the entire Mississippi coast and into Albama as far as 160 km from the storm’s center.New Orleans has a long history of natural disasters being geographically positioned in a region frequently hit by hurricanes. In the year 1915 a category four hurricane had caused Lake Pontchartrain to overflow killing 275 people in the same area hit badly by the Hurricane Katrina.Hurricane Betsy with category three occurred in 1965, flooded half of New Orleans and submerged up to 20 feet in some areas, and left 60,000 inhabitants homeless.Hurricane Camille hit the Mississippi Gulf near to New Orleans in 1969, once more causing destructive flooding in the area and displacement of people. As recorded by National Weather Service report monsoon season throughout 1995-2004 have brought 13.6 tropical storms, 7.8 hurricanes, 3.8 major hurricanes.References:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/Peter Combs. Clouds and Climate Change; Focus, Vol. 46, Spring 2000Roger G. Barry, Richard J. Chorley. Atmosphere, Weather, and Climate; Routledge, 1998

Essay on Thomas Aquinas’ Theory of Christianity Theology...

Thomas Aquinas’ Theory of Christianity Theology is Science Thomas Aquinas claims Christianity is a science with the use of the writings of Aristotle on scientific knowledge. Aquinas also makes the claim that theology, or the study God, is a science accepted through Revelation. Faith provides ammunition for Aquinas to state that believers of Christianity have the affirmation of God already inside of them. This claim considered that divine writings were inspired by God. Aquinas stated, The principles of any science are either in themselves self-evident, are reducible to the knowledge of a higher science are the principles of sacred doctrine. Once these documents had God’s authority approved by faith, they became indemonstrable knowledge,†¦show more content†¦This provides a standard in which a person could live their lives in a godly manner. A critique that could be levy against Thomas Aquinas’ assertion is that the Holy Scripture in the Christianity religion is the word of God. There are other religions that claim that their doctrine is divinely inspired also. So this would allow other religions to claim the same absoluteness of authority on indemonstrable knowledge as Christianity. For example, the Koran and Torah were also said to be inspired by God. The question arises of which doctrine is the definitive Scripture that God attended for us to use. Thomas Aquinas is going to pick his religion holy doctrine over the other ones due to his faith in Christianity. Another issue with Aquinas argument leads to a discussion that John Dewey brought up in â€Å"The Process of Scientific Thinking of the possibility of indemonstrable knowledge being mistaken or misinterpreted. Even if Scripture is absolute, people’s perception of the doctrine can be fallible. Thomas Aquinas makes a strong argument for theology being a science. He demonstrates how a follower of Christ and a nonbeliever could use a scientific method to come up with absolute proof with axioms provided by Holy Scripture. A problem could takes place when someone misconstrues the word of God and forms absolute beliefs on incorrect interpretation of Scripture. Theology leaves no wiggle room for improvement once an absolute syllogismShow MoreRelatedSt. Thomas Aquinas And The Catholic Church1682 Words   |  7 Pages Luther Vs Aquinas Nick Pascuzzi TH 3000 Dr. Campbell 11/21/2016 â€Æ' St. Thomas Aquinas, was born near Naples, Italy, in 1225. Educated in the Dominican Order in Paris and Cologne, he devoted his life to the knowledge of God. He died in 1274, was canonized in 1323. In 1567 he was proclaimed a Doctor of the Universal Church (NCE 14:13-29). Martin Luther, was born on the 10th of November in 1483 in the Holy Roman Empire. He was baptized as Catholic, but he became a significant figure inRead MoreThe Philosophy Of Religion : Thomas Aquinas And Fredrich Nietzsche1364 Words   |  6 Pagesas well as the day to day norms. Religion has and always will be a hot subject because of this; However, philosophers have developed theories and guidelines to help people to realize what is most suitable, important, and critical in their spiritual lives. However, the Philosophy of Religion caters to everyone, not just believers. Today we will look at Thomas Aquinas and Fredrich Nietzsche and their takes on religion. To fully understand their viewpoints its important to first understand what theRead MoreEvolution And Its Impact On Students Worldview1310 Words   |  6 Pagesengaging with non-believers in topics that they are not knowledgeable of. Augustine also claimed that science and faith should work together in a harmonious relationship. Early scientific discovery did little to question literal interpretations of the Bible, but Augustine pointed out the dangers of quoting scripture and claiming it as truth when non-believers are firmly grounded in their knowledge of science based on experience and reason. According to Augustine, diligent preparation and thoughtful executionRead MoreThe Argument Of Creation Vs. Evolution2468 Words   |  10 Pagesdebated for quite sometime. Since Darwin’s theory of Evolution by Natural Selection was published, some of those that thought the world and its inhabitants was made by a creator now began to think differently. Evolution began to make sens e, there was evidence of certain types of species evolving (as in the finches in the galapogos islands as observed by Darwin) however, with creationism there was no evidence, it was all based on faith. Although Darwin’s theory stands at the forefront for the beliefRead MoreDualism And The Separation Of Mind And Body Essay2046 Words   |  9 Pageswhich explains the outcome of the two eternally opposed principles of good and evil. Good and evil can also be represented as light and darkness. This theory can be found widely relevant in the East, specifically in Persia for several centuries before the era of Christianity. In the third century after Christ, for a time to convert to Christianity, Gnosticism was developed. Christian philosophy exemplified with little differences by theologians and philosophers from St. Augustine. Christian philosophyRead MoreAristotle And Plato s Influence On Western Philosophical Tradition2851 Words   |  12 Pagesmedieval era is considered by modern historians to be heavily influenced by Christian theology. One of the most notable thinkers of this era is Thomas Aquinas, and ironically never considered himself a philosopher, and criticized philosophers for always falling short of the true and proper wisdom to be found in Christian revelation.† From a Voegelinian point of view, Voegelin would have much to critique on Aquinas, in regards to Christian dogma. And lastly modern philosophy, which consist of theRead MoreFaith and Reason Essay1035 Words   |  5 Pagesconsidered anti-Semitic that reason supported religion. The Counterbalance Foundation website observes that before this time, science that contradicted religion was wrong. â€Å"When we look at the history of science, we see that in fact it owes an immense debt to the religious world. In the early Middle Ages – a time when Christian Europe turned away from scientific thinking -- the science, mathematics, and astronomy of the ancient Greeks was kept alive in the Islamic world, where it was further developed andRead MoreDoes God Exist? The Existence Of God?1876 Words   |  8 Pageshuman existence. But the real question is, can we answer any of them? These questions are answered in the arguments of St. Thomas Aquinas, Blaise Pascal and St. Anselm of Canterbury. For thousands of years, theologians, philosophers and scientists have been trying to prove or disprove God’s existence. Many, including the three mentioned above, have strong proofs and theories that attempt to confirm God’s existence. Although, without any scientific evidence, how can they be entirely sure? â€Å"PhilosophicalRead MoreSummary Of Pierre Teilhard De Chardin2134 Words   |  9 PagesJohn Hughes Mr. Lace Senior Theology Honors 18 November 2011 Mr. Lace Trimester Final Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, A. North Whitehead, Monsignor Luigi Guissani, and Charles Hartshorne have contributed significant bits of Theology as the Roman Catholic Church, perhaps a century late, has finally come to a difficult crossroads about the creation of the world: Should the Vatican alter (no pun intended) modify Church Dogmas, which are infallible snippets of doctrinal teaching, or ignore rapidRead MoreRelation Between Science and Religion Essay4079 Words   |  17 Pageson What is the Relation between Science and Religion William Lane Craig Examines several ways in which science and theology relate to each other. Back in 1896 the president of Cornell University Andrew Dickson White published a book entitled A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom. Under White’s influence, the metaphor of â€Å"warfare† to describe the relations between science and the Christian faith became very widespread during the first half of the 20th century. The culturally