ABSTRACT
This chapter explores an alternative way to assert the scientific status of theology that relies upon arguments for scientific realism rather than a universally applicable method. Alister McGrath's proposal is worth evaluating not only because of its depth and nuance but also because it represents a general approach favored by many science and religion scholars, an approach that goes by the name "critical realism." McGrath presents critical realism as a reaction against Enlightenment foundationalism. Enlightenment scholars assume that the truths of science refer to a universally shared reality, and are independent of any local context. McGrath says one problem with foundationalism is that it approaches the study of the natural world with preconceived notions of how best to study it, portraying scientists as making strict theoretical inferences from uninterpreted facts derived from observations or experiments. McGrath's scientific theology relies upon the predictive success of science to endorse its realist perspective, but it also offers something to science in return.