In his new book Thought Experiments, Science, and Theology, Yiftach Fehige investigates the role of thought experiments in science and theology (with an emphasis on the latter). While thought experiments are commonly associated with the natural sciences, philosophy, and ethics, Fehige proposes that theological equivalents serve similar epistemic—albeit context-specific—functions. According to him, thought experimentation is not a subject-specific phenomenon, but rather a universal human way of using idealized, fictitious scenarios as tools for speculation. However, while it is widely acknowledged that narratives play an important role in the world of religion, thought experiments are constrained in certain ways and thus possess a specific level of cognitive efficiency.
In the first part of the book, Fehige provides a clarifying overview of how the discourse around thought experiments evolved, from the time Hans Christian Ørsted coined the term in the early 1900s (in the context of physics) to today. When it comes to scientific thought experiments, the central question has been how we can learn something new about nature by entertaining imagined scenarios without introducing new empirical data. According to one of the main strands of the discourse, thought experiments are nothing more than disguised picturesque arguments that follow deductive or inductive rules of inference (e.g., John Norton). Other authors, however, believe that these narratives serve as vehicles for intuition—of either a Platonic or a naturalistic kind (e.g., James R. Brown and Elke Brendel).
Fehige prefers the latter option, arguing for a nuanced naturalistic view of intuition that can accommodate supernatural events. Furthermore, he recognizes that the intuitions at work in theological thought experiments are influenced by normative sources of religious authority, such as Scripture and Tradition. Even so, imagination is said to lend an "anarchic spin" to the process. On Fehige’s account, imagination is a means of divine revelation that should be interpreted in a diversity affirming manner (taking into account the historical and cultural conditions of human thinking). As a result, imaginative thought experiments have a "playful distancing power" that the author believes is necessary for cognitive progress in both science and theology. On this basis, he rejects John Polkinghorne's "theologically enhanced scientific monism" (a metaphysical stance in which science and theology can advance in a way that results in a "monotonical increase" in knowledge in both areas)
Regarding the work of imagination, Fehige is influenced by the work of the late Tom McLeish—specifically about McLeish's claim that imagination is an important part of the common ground between science and religion. Fehige argues that theological thought experiments, like their scientific counterparts, can be cognitively efficient in a variety of ways. As one of Fehige’s prime examples, he refers to the way in which St. Augustine ascertains the consequences of the Fall for human nature (explicitly concerning human sexuality). According to Fehige, this resembles the situation between Einstein and Bohr over the clock-in-the box thought experiment.
Another example is The Book of Job, which has a long history of diverse interpretations. For example, David Brown sees it as a Christological thought experiment, whereas McLeish sees it as centered on order and chaos (basically a thought experiment in natural philosophy). According to Fehige, this demonstrates how imaginative engagement with a single stream of divine revelation sustains theological diversity. On his account, the "surplus composition" of the Book of Job is consistent with characteristic plasticity of many thought experiments. Fehige's third example of theological experimentation comes from Talmudic literature. In this case, his target is a particular attitude depicted in various Talmudic narratives that allows for self-criticism and ambivalence about one's own norms and values. Following Menachem Fich's proposal, the author understands the resulting dissonance in terms of thought experimentation and considers imagination to be an essential component of this procedure. According to him, this characteristic feature stems from "the notion of a covenant of constructive confrontation," which he sees as "dictating the deep grammar" of the Talmud.
Fehige's book is an excellent and innovative contribution to the academic study of science and religion as well as the study of thought experiments. Of particular importance is the way in which it highlights the essential—but not so easily captured—role that imagination plays in both of these areas. However, there are also areas that remain open for further explication.
For example, while Fehige claims that imaginative thought experiments involve more than just propositional content, a more detailed description of how imagination contributes to this end result would be helpful. While his three primary examples of theological thought experiments provide clues to what such a contribution entails, there is still room for further clarification. Not least, it concerns the constraints that allow thought experiments (whether scientific or theological) to be cognitively efficient. Fehige believes that religious authorities such as Tradition and Scripture constrain theological thought experiments. However, as a reader, I become curious about the way in which this relates to the claim that religious belief has a cognitive nature (which Fehige discussed earlier) and the way it resembles or differs from the constraint-setting of scientific thought experiments.
But this is not a question that can be answered in the blink of an eye—or, perhaps, in a single volume. What Fehige's book contributes, however, is a valuable piece of the puzzle in understanding how thought experiments contribute to our human thinking in a variety of disciplines and contexts.
Ingrid Malm Lindberg is a visiting researcher at the Centre for Multidisciplinary Research on Religion and Society, Department of Theology, Uppsala University (Sweden).
Ingrid Malm Lindberg
Date Of Review:
May 30, 2024
