El problema de origen del universo. Las teorías físicas de los siglos XX-XXI y las propuestas de San Buenaventura y de Santo Tomás
Cargando...
Fecha
Autores
Director
Enlace al recurso
https://revistas.usantotomas.edu.co/index.php/albertus-magnus/article/view/10973
10.15332/25005413.10973
10.15332/25005413.10973
DOI
ORCID
Google Scholar
Cvlac
gruplac
Descripción Dominio:
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
Universidad Santo Tomás
Compartir
Descripción
El objetivo de este artículo es analizar la relación entre relatos científicos y relatos teológicos. Aquí las preguntas son : ¿se trata de relatos opuestos? o ¿ si el relato científico y teológico son distintos discursos narrativos que conservan su independencia? Compartimos la opinión de que éstos son distintos discursos narrativos que pueden tener diferentes formas de encuentro, pero no es correcto hacer evaluación de un discurso mediante la metodología y supuestos de otro discurso. En nuestra opinión muy frecuente en la mirada científica se hace este tipo de evaluaciones. Por ejemplo se considera que el relato teológico es bueno cuando no introduce elementos perturbadoras para el relato científico
En este tipo de procedimientos poco importa la frase de Galileo, acerca de que una cosa es cómo va el cielo y otra cosa cómo se va al cielo. La posición modernista es que el relato teológico tiene que ser alineado con el relato científico y si esto no sucede no puede ser considerado como una reliquia del pasado o como una buena expresión artística de la actividad humana. Nuestra posición basada en la racionalidad abierta y la indeterminación de la traducción sostiene que tenemos relatos complementarios, y que esta complementariedad en plenitud podemos apreciarla en la mirada de Dios, la cual es desde nuestra creencia una mirada no competitiva, sino sabia, una mirada en la que las preguntas no buscan satisfacer la curiosidad, sino introducirnos en el mundo de la verdad, la cual con los ojos de Dios es una completitud.
The objective of this article is to analyze the relationship between scientific and theological narratives. The questions are: are these narratives opposed? Our are scientific and theological narratives distinct discourses that maintain their independence? We share the opinion that these are distinct narrative discourses that can have different forms of encounter, but it is not correct to evaluate one discourse using the methodology and assumptions of another discourse. In our opinion, this type of evaluation is frequently made from a scientific perspective. For example, the theological narrative is considered good when it does not introduce elements that disturb the scientific narrative. In this type of procedure, Galileo's phrase about one thing being how the sky goes and another thing being how one goes to the sky is of little importance. The modernist position is that the theological narrative must be aligned with the scientific narrative, and if this does not happen, it cannot be considered as a relic of the past or as a good artistic expression of human activity. Our position, based on open rationality and the indeterminacy of translation, maintains that we have complementary narratives, and that this complementarity in fullness can be appreciated in the gaze of God, which from our belief is a non-competitive gaze, but a wise gaze, a gaze in which questions do not seek to satisfy curiosity, but to introduce us to the world of truth, which with God's eyes is a completeness.
The objective of this article is to analyze the relationship between scientific and theological narratives. The questions are: are these narratives opposed? Our are scientific and theological narratives distinct discourses that maintain their independence? We share the opinion that these are distinct narrative discourses that can have different forms of encounter, but it is not correct to evaluate one discourse using the methodology and assumptions of another discourse. In our opinion, this type of evaluation is frequently made from a scientific perspective. For example, the theological narrative is considered good when it does not introduce elements that disturb the scientific narrative. In this type of procedure, Galileo's phrase about one thing being how the sky goes and another thing being how one goes to the sky is of little importance. The modernist position is that the theological narrative must be aligned with the scientific narrative, and if this does not happen, it cannot be considered as a relic of the past or as a good artistic expression of human activity. Our position, based on open rationality and the indeterminacy of translation, maintains that we have complementary narratives, and that this complementarity in fullness can be appreciated in the gaze of God, which from our belief is a non-competitive gaze, but a wise gaze, a gaze in which questions do not seek to satisfy curiosity, but to introduce us to the world of truth, which with God's eyes is a completeness.
Abstract
Idioma
Palabras clave
complexity, interdisciplinarity, science, theology, cosmology, complejidad, interdisciplinariedad, ciencia, teología, cosmología
Citación
Colecciones
Licencia Creative Commons
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0