Review of 'Time Traveling With Science and the Saints' on 'Goodreads'
1 star
Appalling Scholarship.
Let me begin by mentioning that I have degrees in philosophy and history (with a focus on history of science). What is unfortunate about Erickson's book is that a well meaning idea of documenting the negative aspects of the church (of which there are many), is over shadowed by a complete lack of scholarship (You know you're in trouble when one of the books the author uses as one of his primary resources is a book of quotations!).
The book also continues to propagate ideas that are just plain false. Consider the idea that people of the middle ages believed the earth was flat. Anyone who has taken a university course in the History of Science, or Medieval History will have this illusion dispelled almost immediately (by reading modern scholarship and the original primary source material -- both things that Erickson does not do). Throughout the book he …
Appalling Scholarship.
Let me begin by mentioning that I have degrees in philosophy and history (with a focus on history of science). What is unfortunate about Erickson's book is that a well meaning idea of documenting the negative aspects of the church (of which there are many), is over shadowed by a complete lack of scholarship (You know you're in trouble when one of the books the author uses as one of his primary resources is a book of quotations!).
The book also continues to propagate ideas that are just plain false. Consider the idea that people of the middle ages believed the earth was flat. Anyone who has taken a university course in the History of Science, or Medieval History will have this illusion dispelled almost immediately (by reading modern scholarship and the original primary source material -- both things that Erickson does not do). Throughout the book he appears to quote someone, yet, when you look into his notes to discover where he got his information, you discover that (when it is not from George Seldes book of quotations), it is a secondary source, and many of these are from other atheist-friendly books.
Erickson states at the beginning of the book that he is attempting to counter other pro-Christian books, which is admirable and needed. Unfortunately, he falls into the same trap that he accuses many of his opponents of: a highly biased viewpoint using only sources that back up his view. And in Erickson's case, this is compounded by poor scholarship and an absence of primary source material.
If you are looking for a history of the relationship between science and the church, please look elsewhere. Indeed, may I suggest the book [b:Galileo Goes to Jail and Other Myths about Science and Religion|5543495|Galileo Goes to Jail and Other Myths about Science and Religion|Ronald L. Numbers|https://d202m5krfqbpi5.cloudfront.net/books/1347938861s/5543495.jpg|5714549] This book has chapters written by scholars (who are both believers and unbelievers) working together to provide the reader with a short, clear, and concise understanding of what the relationship between science and religion has been.