By what authority? Science, theology, and knowledge claims

The reasons for theology's devaluation in Anglo-American academia are manifold, but the question remains, does theology have important truths to contribute to the body of knowledge? The contention underwriting this essay is to suggest that theology is a rational enterprise employing the same methodological standards as science. Taking it that the pursuit of truth is the goal of academia, the discussion is taken further into concerns about the fundamental nature of all knowledge.;The first part shows that theology employs the same rational standards as science. A comparison is drawn between the research methodologies of science and theology. This is carried out by following the discussion of two authors who argue for the commonality of methodologies: one with respect to logical positivism, and the other with respect to the more contemporary views proposed by Imre Lakatos. Finishing this part is a discussion of some of the concerns brought forward by both scientists and theologians about the appropriateness of such comparisons.;The second part recognizes that an important question remains open, that of whether the methods of science actually arrive at true beliefs. Thus the discussion turns to the three main theories proposed to answer this question by contemporary philosophers of science: logical positivism, social constructivism and realism. This discussion necessarily involves the metaphysical claims made by these theories, but emphasis is given to the role of consensus and conventionalism in belief formation.;The third, and last part explores the role of appeals to authority in our desire to know, and how this gives rise to an interesting dialectic. Often appeals to authority are rationally suspect, yet much of rationality and justified belief are founded on just such claims. This dialectical relation exists as a fundamental element of all inquiry, and an embrace of it will allow all disciplines of inquiry to limit as well as learn from each other.