THE IDEALIST VIEW OF DIVINE ACTION IN NATURE

Theologies of divine action in nature typically assume physical realism—the view that physical entities and facts are mind-independent and ontologically basic. This article argues that physical realism actually undermines the scientific knowledge theologians seek to engage. Drawing on Howard Robinson's work, the author presents a coherent alternative that denies physical realism. In this account, God's sustaining and governing action in nature operates through the ontological mediation of minds and laws that causally constrain sensations. The proposal also offers a positive research program that incorporates natural science to understand embodiment.

Study at a glance

Abstract

Theologies of divine action in nature have sought to maximize traction with the sciences to secure their credibility. While varying in significant ways, all extant proposals share a commitment to physical realism, the claim that (at least some) physical entities and facts are both mind‐independent and ontologically basic within creation. However, I will argue that this metaphysical commitment undermines the body of scientific knowledge to which theologians wish to be responsive. Is there an alternative? Building on the work of Howard Robinson, I will show that there is a coherent account of mind's place in nature that denies physical realism. Such an account would enable a theological description of God's sustaining and governing action in nature through the ontological mediation of minds and laws causally constraining their sensations. Furthermore, this proposal yields a positive research program that makes essential use of the contributions of the natural sciences to understand the nature of embodiment.