Hugh Lacey sets himself the task of interrogat-ing some of the presuppositions that underliemainstream scientific practice: that the object and(at least potentially) the methodology of study areahistorical and unchanging. Here, Lacey is essen-tially playing Kuhn redivivus – it is all about thestrategy of enquiry and these are historicallydetermined so everything is in flux, etc, etc – buthe dares to go a little farther. He questions the ideathat there is no necessary dialectical link betweenbasic scientific method and the way science isapplied. If two equally valid applicatory strategiesexist, he opines, then one will win out because itbetter serves the interests of the people involved,their sponsors, or society at large. From anhistorical perspective, this is backed up by thefacts. That said, there is some weak philosophisingat work here. A wealth of troublesome evidencehas never disproved a single philosophical nos-trum. By focussing on the intersection betweenabstract and applied science Lacey is certainlyentering fertile territory but he has been distractedby data that fit his theory a little too neatly.Oddly, the two best contributions to this volume

have only a tangential link to the editors’manifesto. Rom Harre and Fathali Moghaddamtake the psychological and psychiatric arts to task.Basing a science (dare we say a pseudo-science) onthe ahistorical idea that universal and eternal lawsdictate human nature and behaviour has all thehallmarks of bunkum. This has been said before,but the repetition is worthwhile.Finally, hats off to David Carr. His essay

doesn’t have a great deal to do with the editors’agenda, but it is supremely interesting. Writinghistory immediately invites scepticism. The histor-ian can never prove anything: his witnesses aredead and there is no way of adjudicating theirreliability. Worse yet, historians usually rely upon

a narrative strategy and this process – neatbeginnings, middles and ends – is often moreabout aesthetic satisfaction than accurate repor-tage. Into the bargain, the historian inevitablyimposes his own prejudices and presuppositionsupon the subject at hand. Carr takes thesecriticisms seriously but he mounts a bold rebuttal.Firstly, narrative is not the historians’ invention.It is how many of us frame the descriptions ofour lives. Perhaps, as Carr admits, this is amodern, Western ailment (or advantage), but a)that means it is eminently applicable to thehistorical study of the modern West and b) weshouldn’t assume that this interpretative model isabsent from other cultures. There are competitors(historiographical models in which cycles, repeti-tion, or adamantine stability are regnant) but theyalmost always sit alongside a boringly linearindividual narratives. The trick is to respect themall and not shout at the historian when he tries tomake sense of the chaos.This is a rag-bag of a book, but a rather

wonderful one. In many of the essays the editorialbrief is all but dispensed with but this hardlymatters: the results are stimulating. When thecontributors stick to the theme they often saysensible things. Perhaps the most enduring homily isprovided by Michel Paty. Philosophers sometimesassume that they know best, and that scientists goabout their business uncritically, almost robotically.The best scientists don’t do that: they are as puzzledas the rest of us. Paty quotes Einstein. When thingschange, ‘the physicist cannot be satisfied withabandoning to philosophy the critical examinationof the foundations of his science, since he knowsbest and senses where the shoe pinches.’ (p. 11) Thisis worth bearing in mind.

Hartlepool, UK Jonathan Wright

Technology, Trust and Religion: Roles of Religion in Controversies and the Modification of Life. Edited byWillem B. Drees. Pp. 316, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, Leiden University Press, 2009, $49.95.

Drees is the chair of the philosophy of religion andethics at Leiden University and is the currenteditor of Zygon: A Journal of Religion and Science.Drees is no stranger to the theology and sciencediscussion, having previously edited numerousother volumes (e.g. Creative Creatures: ValuesAnd Ethical Issues in Theology, Science AndTechnology, Wisdom or Knowledge?: Science,Theology and Cultural Dynamics, and Creation’sDiversity: Voices from Theology and Science [all byT.&T. Clark, 2005, 2006, and 2008, respectively],amongst others. In this most recent book, hebrings together texts that seek to address such

questions as, What does it mean to be human inour technology-driven world?, What is the role ofreligion in responding to the ecological crisis?, andIn the eyes of scientists, is the public ignorant?Drees acknowledges that these questions have nosingule correct answer, but offers this volume inhopes of working toward plausible responses.The book divides into four sections, addressing

current lacunas in the science-theology dialogue:part one, composed of three chapters, addressesour technological conditions as twenty-first cen-tury humans; part two, comprising four chapters,speaks to the current ecological crisis and the

356 BOOK REVIEWS

religious resources to address it; part three,similarly composed of four chapters, addressesconcerns of biotechnology; rounding out thevolume are four chapters that relate to therelationship between the public – broadly con-sidered – and scientists. In the introductorychapter Drees notes that this volume is important,as the term ‘technology’ not only refers to devicesthat people employ in their daily lives, but also tothe social systems and skills that underlie thesedevices. He claims there are two general attitudesthat are commonly propounded regarding tech-nology in the twenty-first century: it can be seenoptimistically as a liberator of the human condi-tion (i.e. with reference to its potential to relivehumanity’s burdens and increase its overallstandard of living), or it can be seen as a threatto humanity (i.e. with respect to proclivity topromote uniformity and efficiency to the detrimentof authentic human lives). Instead of these twocommonly held options, Drees prefers a third wayof seeing technology: that technology can be – andshould be –used instrumentally (or contextually) inthe twenty-first century; picturing technology inthis manner emphasizes human responsibility itsdesign, deployment, and consequences.Representative of part one, Bronislaw Szerzyns-

ki speaks of the religious roots of the currenttechnological condition, noting that its rise relatesto humanity’s values, our notions of nature, andour view of the divine in the first chapter. KarenParna then addresses humanity’s love of technol-ogy in the ‘Internet Age’ in the third chapter,arguing in part that the internet serves as a vesselof religious sentiments. Tony Watling – opening

the second part of the book in chapter four – offersan overview of how humans have appealed toreligious traditions in their attempts to re-imaginethe human role with reference to nature. Drawingfrom a Christian viewpoint, Francis Kadaplackalspeaks of human embeddedness, freedom, andresponsibility in and toward the environment,basing his discussion on the classical imago Deiconcept (chapter six).Notable from part three is Michiel van Well’s

chapter concerning genetically modified foods,noting especially the religious concerns aboutpurity (i.e. chapter nine). Also from part three,Peter Derkx’s contribution (chapter ten) addressesthe possibility of life-extending technologies, andtheir significance in the twenty-first century con-text. Drawing from modern political philosophy,Patrick Loobuyck begins part four (chaptertwelve), and seeks to explicate the role thatreligion should play in a pluralistic democracy.Closing the volume, Nancie Erhard explores howmulti-faith alliances could contribute positively toaddress the ecological challenges of the twenty-first century.All in all, this volume is a welcome contribution

to a heretofore neglected concern: religious atti-tudes toward technology in the twenty-first cen-tury. With contributors to this edited textaddressing their areas of expertise, the text willbe profitably used as a companion in philosophy ofreligion courses, and read by participants in thetheology and science dialogue.

Regent University,Virginia Beach, VA

Bradford McCall

Reason, Faith and Revolution: Reflections on the God Debate. By Terry Eagleton. Pp. xii, 185, New Haven/London, Yale University Press, 2009, $16.00.

In a black-and-white world that held only clearchoices between good and evil or right and wrong,it would always be true that ‘the enemy of myenemy is my friend’. Terry Eagleton’s delightfuland thought-provoking rant on both the secularleft and the religious right, entitled Reason, Faithand Revolution. Reflections on the God Debate,shows how far this is from the world in which weactually live. The book is the published version ofthe Dwight Harrington Terry Foundation lecturesthat Eagleton delivered at Yale in April 2008. Atturns witty and biting (and often both together),Reason, Faith and Revolution engages the groundand the rules of the so-called ‘God Debate’ inthe West from Eagleton’s unique perspective

as literary critic, Marxist, and Christian. Hisapproach is likely to be unpalatable to strongliberals and conservatives alike, but for many‘radical moderates’ in the middle, Eagleton offers avery readable blend of cogent analysis, incisivecritique, and guarded prescription for how toaddress the intellectual muddle in which thecultural conversation so often finds itself.Eagleton’s book is not a sustained argument for

one particular idea, but rather – as the subtitlewould suggest – a somewhat meandering reflectionon the problem of God-talk at the beginning of the21st Century. Given the size of the book, however,that is not a detraction. In fact, the rabbit trails hefollows about 9/11, literary works, and the foibles

BOOK REVIEWS 357