CRITICAL REALISM REDUX: A RESPONSE TO JOSH REEVES with Paul Allen, "Critical Realism Redux: A Response to Josh Reeves"; JB Stump, "Science and Other Common Nouns: Further Implications of Anti-Essentialism"; Peter N. Jordan, "Legitimacy and the Field of Science and Religion"; Jaime Wright, "Making Space for the Methodological Mosaic: The Future of the Field of Science and Religion"; Victoria Lorrimar, "Science and Religion: Moving beyond the Credibility Strategy"; and Josh Reeves, "Methodology in Science and Religion: A Reply to Critics"

This article combines an appreciation of several themes in Josh Reeves'sAgainst Methodology in Science and Religion: Recent Debates on Rationality and Theologywhile arguing in favor of critical realism. The author holds that critical realism manages to combine the objective truth reached through inference and especially cognitive acts of judgment as well as the various, contingent historical contexts that also define where science is practiced. Reeves advocates a historical perspective, but this article claims that in order for critical realism to be credible, a philosophical perspective must be maintained.