Just Droppin In

Faith / Science Links

I do not know if anyone is bothering to monitor these inactive blogs but I will be dumping faith and science links here as I come across them. The link below is an interesting atheistic music video based on Carl Sagan's writing. It features an image made of the Earth from as far away as any of our exploratory satellites have been able to reach and send a picture of Earth back ... the photo was taken at Carl Sagan's insistence and was the source for his book "Pale Blue Dot".

Link to Video

A Time to Begin a Time to End

I started this blog to help me teach my courses. The experiment was not successful in any way that I had intended it. The stats indicate a fairly constant number of people monitoring the blog but the use of the blog as a means for students to comment, ask questions or offer supplementary material was, for the most part, an unused opportunity. I had mis-read why some students were silent or apathetic in my courses and it was not for lack of an anonymous opportunity to participate at their own time and in their own way.

I made a commitment to keep the blog going for the whole academic year and that is what I did. My sabbatical will take me away from teaching for a year and so I will leave this blog up for a while and then decide if I should delete the whole blog.

To those of you that dropped in ... thanks for looking (and in some cases commenting). The companion blog to this Professor Honeydew will also fall silent now. Again I will let it be for a while and then decide if it should be deleted. If I decide to continue to offer anything up for blogging over the next year or so it will be on the research blog "A Pale Blue Gas". We will see.

Take Care.

Professor Honeydew

RS3853 End of the Road

Class,

The class average for the journals (61%, C-) was lower than usual due to an unusually large number of late submissions and incomplete journals.

In general I do not give out subjective evaluation marks but will be happy to discuss the composition of the class mark after you get your final grade. In general terms the class subjective evaluation was 69 % (C+) which is about right for this course. Each week each student was marked on preparation, participation and quality of contribution.

The class average for the term papers was the highest ever for this course at 71 % (B-). With that high an average there can't be too much in the way of complaints but I did notice consistent problems with assertion and with language (grammar and punctuation).

With respect to assertion the problem was sometimes that what you said was true but you had not justified the statement so that it looked like simple assertion. In other cases it seemed clear that the student was reading meaning into sources that simply were not in the original source.

With respect to grammar and language:

A sentence consists of a subject, a verb and an object and it is generally good form to make sure that the number of each is in agreement (is vs are etc.)

It is bad form (though not illegal) to start a sentence with "However" because the subject and object of the sentence end up in separate sentences. So it may be OK to use a "However" once in a while for dramatic effect but several of you are addicted to the form. One student had four such howevers in one paragraph.

A sentence that cannot be read in one breath is too long.

A paragraph should have more than one sentence and deal with one topic. A paragraph should not be used to mark where you got tired and decided to go for coffee.

Written English is not the same a written speech (for the love of all that is sacred please learn this lesson before you graduate). Sometimes the voices in your head lie to you. You have to realize that your high school English teacher could not get a "real" job (or did not get their poetry or book published) because they could not write. That means that the "stream of consciousness creative writing" that got you high marks in high school just won't float in University.

Anyway, no one lost a lot of marks for grammar it was the assertion thing that made the difference usually. I privately suspect that the way all the papers twisted into papers on ecology and used the same core references that there was some significant double dipping going on but I am too lazy to make that dog hunt. As Calvin said "Shoot them all and let God sort them out".

So in a few short years your child will be reading a book in your lap and ask you about dinosaurs or your church will ask you to teach an adult or high school Sunday school class where science and religion will come up. I am not so conceited to think that you will remember anything directly from this course but the intention was that our students would go out into the Christian community with a core competence and a confidence when dealing with faith and science issues.

All truth is God's truth no matter where you come across it. Keep asking the question "Why?" and you will eventually find yourself face-to-face with God. Then what do you do?

Take care, have a good summer.

Recent Faith and Science Cartoons

Click on the image to see at full size, click on the link to follow to the comic website


Fisher



Pearls Before Swine



Speedbump

Nature: Red in Tooth and Claw

From "News of the Weird"

American researchers in West Africa believe they've found the first instance of an animal (other than humans) building a multi-step weapon, after observing wild chimpanzees grab sticks from 1 to 4 feet long, sharpen the ends with their teeth, and murderously jab them into deep tree hollows where delicious bush babies may be nesting. Writing in the journal Current Biology, the team even reported observing the chimps tasting the tips after the stabs, to ascertain whether they had actually located a prey. (One of the researchers said the ferocity of the jabbing reminded her of the shower scene in Alfred Hitchcock's "Psycho.") [Tampa Tribune-Washington Post, 2-23-07]

Oh ... what's a bushbaby?



Sort of makes you think when you see the tender and loving chimps in those documentaries huh? I really don't see how this is any conceptually different from the well known behaviour of apes to use tools to fish termites out of their mounds but the escalation of scale is impressive.

Today In History: April 19

Charles Robert Darwin
12 February 1809 –
19 April 1882


"The old argument of design in nature, as given by Paley, which formerly seemed to me to be so conclusive, fails, now that the law of natural selection has been discovered. We can no longer argue that, for instance, the beautiful hinge of a bivalve shell must have been made by an intellignet being, like the hinge of a door by man. There seems to be no more design in the variability of organic beings and in the action of natural selection, than in the course which the wind blows."

Charles Darwin (c1880)

Open Thread: Week 12

Humanity

"The issue of free will is a metaphysical issue and its resolution calls for a metaphysical decision. Many theologians will wish to treat as basic the human intuition of free will and responsible moral choice. There is nothing is contemporary science to forbid their doing so." (p. 58)

"There is a consensus among modern theologians that the third chapter of Genesis is not a literal account of a single disastrous primeval incident, but it is a myth (that is to say, not a falsehood but a truth conveyed in narrative form, because only story could carry the necessary depth of meaning. ...

Genesis 3 portrays this experience in the post-Eden life to which Adam and eve were condemned and it diagnoses its origin in a chosen alienation of humanity from God.
...

Such a view is clearly untenable today, considered as an historical account. Earthquakes, volcanoes, hurricanes, and animal death - all antedate the appearance of humanity on Earth by hundreds of millions of years." (p. 64)

Theism

"This feeling is induced by two insistent metaquestions to which we now turn: 'Why is the physical world so intelligible to us?' and 'Why are its laws so finely tuned to the possibility of a fruitful history?' Putting it more briefly, 'Why is science possible'and 'Why is the Universe do special?'" (p. 72)

Divine Action

"One should look for God's presence in the historical contingency (chance) as well as the regularity (necessity) of what is happening." (p. 84)

"Augustine and Boethius gave expression to the belief of classic theism that God perceives the whole of cosmic history 'at once', a timeless act of knowing by the One who is outside time altogether." (p. 90)

"It is scarcely surprising that classical theism endorsed the ineffable idea of primary causality." (p. 91)

"It is theologically incredible that God acts as a kind of celestial conjurer, doing occasional tricks to astonish people but most of the tie not bothering. Such a capricious notion of divine action is totally unacceptable. The main problem of miracle, from the theological point of view, is how such wholly exceptional events can be reconciled with divine consistency." (p. 92)

"Miracles as not to be interpreted as divine acts against the laws of nature (for those laws are themselves expressions of God's will) but as profound revelations of the character of the divine relationship to creation." (p. 93)

"The existence of moral evil is then seen to be the necessary cost of the existence of the greater good of human freedom and moral responsibility." (p. 94)

Christian Theology

"The purpose of this chapter, therefore, will be to illustrate how someone with the experience and habits of thought of a scientist approaches central questions of specifically Christian belief." (p. 97)

"The resurrection of Christ is not something that can be established beyond a peradventure, or understood in a completely straightforward way. If it happened, it is the most significant event in all history and it carries with it profound implications for who Jesus really was. If it did not happen, Christianity is either deluded or reduced to a kind of pious wishing that it had been so. It is not easy to say precisely what 'happen'means for so unique an event, but its significance turns on the truth or falsehood of the fundamental Christian claim that 'Jesus lives!' No one can convince the skeptical against their will, but there is both significant historical and theological motivation of the belief. It is a belief held by the writer of this book."

"There are times when one must cling to the strangeness of experience, resisting the temptation to deny part of that experience in order to achieve a facile, but unsatisfactory, relief from perplexity." (p. 109)

"Most theological thinking (indeed one might say, most profound thinking of any kind) is concerned with trying to steer a path between the errors that lie in the oversimplified extremes of a complex situation." (p. 113)

"Polkinghorne has emphasized that the empty tomb asserts that Christ's risen and glorified body is the transformation of his dead body, thereby implying a destiny in Christ for matter as well as for humanity." (p. 117)

"Theology's expression of its hope must be consistent with science's prediction of physical futility, but theology is entitled to look beyond that and to make use of insights derived from its own conviction of the faithfulness of God." (p. 118)

The Search for Knowledge and Wisdom

"Science provides opportunities foraction but it does not itself tell us how these opportunities should be used. It confers knowledge but not wisdom. In religion, however, belief is inseparable from praxis, for a religious understanding carries unavoidable implications for conduct." (p. 129)

"A most significant aspect of the interaction between science and theology is the latter's provision of a ground for the ethical guidelines within which the great endeavour of science and technology can only rightly be pursued" (p. 133)

Contact

Link to the Internet Movie Database Citation for Contact


Young Ellie: Dad, do you think there's people on other planets?
Ted Arroway: I don't know, Sparks. But I guess I'd say if it is just us... seems like an awful waste of space.

Ellie Arroway: Prove me wrong Fish.

Ellie Arroway: Mathematics is the only true universal language.

Ellie Arroway: Mrs. Constantine? May I have a word with you?
Rachel Constantine: Certainly.
Ellie Arroway: Um, I have a big problem.
Rachel Constantine: Yes?
Ellie Arroway: Uh, do you know where I can find like a really great dress?

Ellie Arroway: l read your book.
Palmer Joss: Here we go.
Ellie Arroway: You want me to quote you? "lronically, the thing people are most hungry for; meaning,is the one thing science hasn't been able to give them."
Palmer Joss: Yeah.
Ellie Arroway: [humorously] Come on! lt's like you're saying that science killed God. What if science simply revealed that He never existed in the first place?
Palmer Joss: I think we're gonna need to get some air.
Ellie Arroway: Oh?
Palmer Joss: [takes two champagne glasses] And a few more of these...

Ellie Arroway: So what's more likely? That an all-powerful, mysterious God created the Universe, and decided not to give any proof of his existence? Or, that He simply doesn't exist at all, and that we created Him, so that we wouldn't have to feel so small and alone?

[Ellie challenges Palmer to prove the existence of God]
Palmer Joss: Did you love your father?
Ellie Arroway: What?
Palmer Joss: Your dad. Did you love him?
Ellie Arroway: Yes, very much.
Palmer Joss: Prove it.

[Witnessing a celestial light show up close]
Ellie Arroway: Some celestial event. No - no words. No words to describe it. Poetry! They should've sent a poet. So beautiful. So beautiful... I had no idea.

Ellie Arroway: I... had an experience... I can't prove it, I can't even explain it, but everything that I know as a human being, everything that I am tells me that it was real! I was given something wonderful, something that changed me forever... A vision of the universe, that tells us, undeniably, how tiny, and insignificant and how... rare, and precious we all are! A vision that tells us that we belong to something that is greater then ourselves, that we are *not*, that none of us are alone! I wish... I... could share that... I wish, that everybody, if only for one... moment, could feel... that awe, and humility, and hope. But... That continues to be my wish.

The Creation and E. O. Wilson

"Let us see, then, if we can, and you are willing, to meet on the near side of metaphysics in order to deal with the real world we share." (p. 4)

"If religion and science could be united on the common ground of biological conservation, the problem would soon be solved." (p. 5)

"Scientific knowledge, humanized and well taught, is the key to achieving a lasting balance in our lives." (p. 12)

"But what is Nature? The simplest possible answer is also the best: Nature is that part of the environment and its life forms that remains after the human impact. Nature is all in planet Earth that has no need of us and can stand alone" (p. 15)

"People need insects to survive, but insects do not need us. If all humankind were to disappear tomorrow, it is unlikely that a single insect species would go extinct, except three forms of human body and head lice." (p. 33)

"Such is the philosophy of exemptionalism, which supposes that the special status on Earth of humanity lifts us above the laws of Nature. Exemptionalism takes one or the other of two forms. The first, just expressed, is secular: don't change course now human genius will provide. The second is religious: don't change course now, we are in the hands of God" (p. 83)

"Life on this planet can stand no more plundering. Quite apart from obedience to the universal moral imperative to saving the Creation, based on religion and science alike, conserving biodiversity is the best economic deal humanity has ever had placed before it since the invention of agriculture." (p. 99)

"...it is possible to glean a picture of the great goals of present-day biology. They are, I believe, as follows:
Create life: ...
reconstruct the steps that led to the origin of life ...
cure disease and repair injuries...
explain the mind ...
complete the mapping of Earth's fauna and flora ...
advance medicine, agriculture and public health. ...
Create a Tree of Life for all species ...
protect and stabilize Earth's biodiversity ...
unveil the coevolution of genes and culture." (p. 106)

"Ultimately, and at the deepest level, the Encyclopedia of Life is destined, I believe, to transform the very nature of biology, because biology is primarily a descriptive science" (p. 123)

"The Holy Grail of liberal education is the formula by which passion can be systematically expanded for both science and the humanities, hence the best in culture" (p. 127)


"Chapter 14: How to Learn Biology and How to Teach It
Teach top-down ...
Reach outside biology ...
Focus on problem solving ...
Cut deep and travel far ...
Commit yourself"

"Once the standard symbols and operations of mathematics are learned and used repeatedly to the point of second nature, scanning an equation is not very different from reading a passage in a book." (p. 133)

"From the freedom to explore comes the joy of learning. From knowledge acquired by personal initiative arises the desire for more knowledge. And from mastery of the novel and beautiful world awaiting every child comes self-confidence. The growth of the naturalist is like the growth of the musician or athlete: excellence for the talented, lifelong enjoyment for the rest, benefit for humanity" (p. 147)

"My foundation of reference has been the culture of science and some of secularism, as I understand them. From that foundation I have focused on the interaction of three problems that affect everyone: the decline of the living environment, the inadequacy of science education, and the moral confusions caused by the exponential growth of biology. In order to solve these problems, I've argued, it will be necessary to find common ground on which the powerful forces of religion and science can be joined. The best place to start is the stewardship of life." (p. 165)

"You and I are both humanists in the broadest sense: human welfare is at the center of our thought. But the difference between humanism based on religion and humanism based on science radiates through philosophy and the very meaning we assign ourselves as a species. ... What are we to do? Forget the differences, I say. Meet on common ground. That might not be as difficult as it seems at first. When you think about it our metaphysical differences have remarkably little effect on the conduct of our separate lives. My guess is that we are about equally ethical, patriotic, and altruistic. We are products of a civilization that rose both from religion and the science-based Enlightenment. We would gladly serve on the same jury, fight the same wars, sanctify human life with the same intensity. And surely we also share a love of the Creation." (p. 168)

OK, So it was never really about length but ...

As Nietze said, "That which does not kill you will make you stronger."

The term paper is now behind you. The average length of the term papers submitted was 1740 +/- 550 words. When you think about it that is a respectable length for an essay. The shortest essay was 1161 words and the longest was 2279 words.

Those of you with overdue interlibrary loans had better get them back to the library or face penalties.

Open Thread: Week 9/10

The Area of Interaction

"In actual fact the truth is altogether more complex and correspondingly more interesting" (p. 5)

"The Galileo affair by no means indicates that there is an inevitable incompatibility between science and religion. One unwise incident does not imply a continuing conflict"

"Theology discovered that the dignity of humankind depended neither upon its inhabiting the center of the universe nor upon Homo sapiens being a separately and instantaneously created species." (p. 8)

"The doctrine of creation implies that:
- the word is orderly, since God is rational;
- no prior constraints are imposed on the Creator's choice of creation's pattern, so that one has to look (observe and experiment) to see what the divine will has selected;
- because creation is not itself sacred, it can be investigated with impiety;
- because the world is God's creation, it is a worthy object of study." (p. 9)

"Scientists are driven by the desire to understand and not simply by the ability to correlate or predict accurately." (p. 13)

"The occasional occurrence of radical revision in scientific theory-making means that one cannot claim the achievement of science to be that of the attainment of absolute truth." (p. 16)

The Scientific Picture of the World

"This decision corresponds to the realist strategy of seeking as close and alignment as possible between epistemology and ontology. In a phrase of Polkinghorn's, "Epistemology models ontology" ..." (p. 31)

"In the minds of contemporary scientists, the guarantee of reality is not objectivity but intelligibility ..." (p. 33)

"Both chance and necessity are indispensable partner in the fruitful history of the universe. A purely contingent word would be too haphazard to be fertile; a purely necessitarian world would be too rigid to be fertile." (p. 39)

"On one hand, in a deterministic universe, total knowledge of the present would enable total prediction of the future and total retrodiction of the past (as Laplace pointed out two centuries ago), so that in that sense it would be quite natural to accord past, present and future equal ontological status in this case. On the other hand, an open universe with a variety of causal principles at work, including the choices of free agents, is naturally conceived of as a world of true becoming in which the reality of the moving present would be expected to be accommodated, rather than a world of static atemporality" (p. 48)

Science / Religion Debate In Time Magazine

The link below is to a debate between two men of science in Time Magazine from last fall. Again this course is not about evolution but it does address the philosophical positions of thiesm and reductionism. In this debate we have a sometimes unvarnished and clear view of the end result of reductionism. It makes for interesting reading.

Link to Dawkins / Collins Debate in Time

Thinking Evolution While Believing Creationism

A number of you have expressed interest in the case of the man that worked several years to get a PhD in evolutionary geology while believing in creationism. I have given a link to the article below.

Link to Creationist with PhD in Evolutionary Geology



Click on the image to see at full size.

Preparation for Part III: Contemporary Science

Some students will have problems with details of the next part of the course. In particular the discoveries and interpretations of modern science and specifically quantum science. There is no doubt that the recent experiments cause serious concerns with our perception of "reality".

To break us in gently I would invite you to spend some time with Richard Feynman. He was an extraordinary scientist that died in 1988. He was (and is) considered extraordinary because he combined genius, brilliance (never forget that they are different) and personality in a package that each generation seeks in its leaders. Students that were taught by him were devoted to him like disciples and he marked those that he touched. Most of America "discovered" Richard Feynman not because of his publications, discoveries or his Nobel Prize. He came to the worlds attention during the investigation into the first failure of the space shuttle. He was on the committee looking into the accident. During one particularly onerous session with one of the manufacturers of the shuttle (about the temperature dependence of the elasticity of the rubber rings that failed and caused the accident) Richard Feynman grabbed a piece of the rubber and plunged it into the pitcher of ice water that the committee had been drinking. It was immediately evident that in even this simple experiment that the rubber became stiff and would not form a seal thus leading to the failure of the shuttle. He was that kind of guy.

One of the last students to be taught by Richard Feynman wrote this:

"Feynman was gazing at a rainbow as if he had never seen one before. Or maybe as if it would be his last.

I approached him cautiously and joined him staring at the rainbow. It wasn’t something I normally did – in those days.

“Do you know who first explained the true origin of the rainbow ?” I asked.

“It was Descartes” he said. After a moment he looked me in the eye. “And what do you think was the salient feature of the rainbow that inspired Descartes mathematical analysis?” he asked.

“I give up ... what would you say inspired his theory?”

“I would say his inspiration was that he thought rainbows were beautiful”"

Feynman’s Rainbow, Leonard Mlodinow, Warner books, New York, 2003.

Of all the geniuses that populate the modern world of physics Richard Feynman was the most reflective and willing to engage the humanities in discussion. I strongly think that you would benefit from taking a few minutes and watch this video of Feynman that was recently posted by an Institute of Technology (so I assume that the rights are "clean")

Link to Feynman Video

Open Thread: Week 8 Thinking About Science

"...evangelicals who pursue science in the universities, who are employed as scientific experts for industry and government, or who teach science at the Christian colleges have usually approached their subjects as carefully segregated fields of knowledge rather than with the intent of studying scientific concerns in relation to theology or other spheres of thought" (p. 177)

"For nineteenth century evangelicals, science usually meant "Baconianism," or the belief that strict induction from verified individual facts to more general laws offered the best way to understand the data of any subject." (p. 178)

"Precisely this belief - that properly scrutinized results of the main culture's scientific enterprises should assist biblical interpretation - was the sacrifice offered by the Evangelical mind on the alter of fundamentalist theology" (p. 185)

"Modern creationism arose, by contrast, from the efforts of earnest Seventh Day Adventists who wanted to show that the sacred writings of Adventist founder Ellen G. White (who made much of a recent earth and the Noachian deluge) could provide a framework for studying the history of the earth." (p. 189)

"Reasons for the success of creation science are, by the nature of the case, complex. Doubtless a combination of factors account for what is one of the great innovations of recent Evangelical history - the establishment of an alternative form of science to the form taught by the intellectual establishments of the culture.

... first because of the intuitive belief of many evangelicals that it embodied the simple teachings of scripture.

...the production of influential biology textbooks that not only introduced major contemporary findings but also propounded grandly phrased metaphysical claims about the evolutionary character of the cosmos.

...the widespread resentment against America's self-appointed knowledge elites.

... A biblical literalism, gaining strength since the 1870's, has fueled both the intense concern for human origins and the end times." (p. 193)

"Creationists regularly reaffirm the principles of Baconian science: no speculation without direct empirical proof, no deductions from speculative principles, no science without extensive empirical evidence. The tragedy is that creationists preserve a misguided Baconianism for the Bible and abandon a healthy Baconianism for science." (p. 197)

"For Galileo, as for Bacon and Augustine before him, to think that one could interpret the Bible on scientific questions without employing a dialogue between natural and biblical observations was to guarantee misunderstanding of Scripture." (p. 206)

"The testimony of Augustine, Bacon, Galileo, and Warfield can be summarized by focusing on a concrete example: if the consensus of modern scientists, who devote their lives to looking at the data of the physical world, is that humans have existed on this planet for a very long time, it is foolish for biblical interpreters to say that ""the Bible teaches" the recent creation of human beings. ... It means that, for people today to say they are being loyal to the Bible and to demand belief in a recent creation of humanity as a sign of obedience to Scripture is in fact being unfaithful to the Bible, which, in Psalm 19 and elsewhere, calls upon the followers of God to listen to the speech that God has caused the natural world to speak." (p. 207)

Open Thread: Week 7 Natural Theology and History

Chapter 6: The Fortunes and Functions of Natural Theology
“The object of the chapter is to uncover some of the reasons why this integration of science and religion proved so viable, despite the existence of trenchant critiques. We shall also consider the extent to which a commitment to natural theology affected the scientific enterprise and the extent to which advances in science affected the plausibility of arguments from design. ” (p. 15)

“The idea that divine wisdom could be discerned in nature was attractive in different ways, both to Christian apologists and to deists. Christians found the argument useful in their dialogues with unbelief. It seemed to offer independent proof of a God who they believed had also revealed Himself in the person of Christ. On the other hand, Deists also had reasons for promoting the design argument. The more that could be knwn of God through rational inference the less perhaps it was necessary to refer to revelation at all” (p. 193)

“For Calvin, any knowledge of God inferred from nature would be distorted, the defective product of a dimmed and fallen intellect. The image could only be rectified by reading nature through the spectacles of Scripture” (p. 195)

“Natural theology flourished in England not because of a peculiar English mentality but because there were social and political circumstances that gave the English Enlightenment a distinctive character” (p. 200)

“… according to Kant, was that no matter how much wise artistry might be displayed in the world, it could never demonstrate the moral wisdom that had to be predicated of God” (p. 205)

“On one level, natural theology was not so much destroyed by science as eased out of scientific culture by a growing irrelevance.” (p. 219)

“Whewell continued to argue that the best explanation for the mind’s capacity to discover scientific truth was that it had been designed for the purpose. As priest and preacher, however he stressed that the way back to God was not through rational considerations. For one thing, that would leave God out of the conversion process; for another it would take insufficient account of the fact that design arguments were really only compelling to those that already believed.” (p. 224)

Chapter 7: Visions of the Past: Religious Belief and the Historical Sciences
“The assumptions made in reconstructing the past were often highly controversial even among naturalists themselves. We shall therefore stress the competition between rival scenarios, in which the political and religious preferences sometimes constituted a hidden agenda. Although there were countless attempts to harmonize these disturbing vistas with biblical texts, they were eventually abandoned – at least among academic theologians – as the methods of historical research were brought to bear on questions of biblical authorship” (p. 14)

“With the emergence of more sophisticated historical scholarship, particularly in Germany, it had already become clear to many Christian intellectuals that adherence to the literal inerrancy of Scripture was no way to present the credentials of Christianity to the modern world.” (p. 231)

“The science of history had created a watershed. One set of presuppositions took one toward a more human, but historically elusive Christ. The other – more traditional – allowed the retention of the Christ of faith, but at the cost of severing ones ties with what Strauss called “our modern world”” (p. 270)

DesCartes and Talking Animals

We have been talking about the philosophy of DesCartes and whether we would eat animals if we could speak with them. These cartoons speak to the same issue.

Open Thread: Week 6 Mechanical and Enlightened

“The theme of Chapter IV is the mechanization of the natural world – that seventeenth century development which has often been seen as a decisive advance on organic models of the cosmos.”(p. 13)

“One of the many ironies in our story is that a model for the universe, which in the seventeenth century was used to affirm God’s sovereignty, was used by the deists of the eighteenth century in their attacks on established religion” (p. 13)

“Isaac Newton saw in the very laws he discovered a proof, not of an absentee clockmaker, but of God’s continued presence in the world” (p. 118)

“The basic postulate of the mechanical philosophies was that nature operates accoding to mechanical principles, the regularity of which can be expressedin the form of natural laws, ideally formulated in mathematical terms” (p. 119)

“This ability to create two worlds, to relate the real world to an idealized mathematical model, was one of the techniques that made modern science possible” (p. 121)

“For Bacon, as for Boyle and Newton after him, it was simply inconceivable that, from chance distribution and collision of atoms, a wolrd of such order could have been produced - and order that the progress of science was confirming rather than destroying” (p. 125)

“An event could be deemed a miracle if it was not explicable in terms of physical laws.” (p. 127)

“He was not bound by any kind of logical necessity, nor by the laws of nature, for they were simply expressions of the way He normally chose to act.” (p. 134)

“Newton’s conviction that “God was everywhere from eternity” had implications for how space and time were to be conceived. They, too, had become absolute rather than relative contructs. For DesCartes there had been no space without matter; for Newton there was no space without God.” (p. 137)

“Chapter V takes us into the eighteenth century and into that period of the “Enlightenment” when the sciences were hailed as instruments of progress and when institutionalized religion, especially in Catholic countries, was vilified for its superstition and priestcraft.” (p. 13)

“It was often not the natural philosophers themselves, but thinkers with a social or political ax to grind, who transformed the sciences into a secularizing force.” (p. 13)

“If scientific knowledge derived from reflection on ideas that arose ultimately from sense experience, it was tempting to generalize and say that no other mode of knowing was possible” (p. 154)

“An antipathy to voluntarist theologies is evident in Leibniz’s remark that a secure foundation for law is to be found not so much in the divine will as in His intellect, not so much in His power as in His wisdom.” (p. 161)

“Miracles, Leibniz insisted, were to supply the needs of grace not to remedy second rate clockwork.” (p. 162)

“Priestley makes a fascinating study because he personified a set of values that allowed the integration of scientific and industrial progress into a process theology, which promised the eventual triumph of rational Christianity. Progress in science was to be “the means under God of extirpating all error and prejudice, and of putting and end to all undue and usurped authority in the business of religion as well as science.”” (p. 180)

“That the Christian religion could be given a rational defense became one of Hume’s principal targets. He did not deny that the universe must have a cause. The question was whether anything could be known about it.” (p. 182)

“The gist of it was that no testimony was sufficient to establish a miracle unless the testimony was such that its falsehood would be more miraculous than the fact that it purported to establish. Defining a miracle as a violation of the laws of nature, Hume insisted that there must be a strong antecedent probability against its having occurred. Human testimony, however, was know to be capricious and corruptible” (p. 184)

Classroom Comments and Participation

Things you can say in class that will get my attention and positive participation notes ...

- "You know, that position sounds a lot like what Poole said but it is different because ..."

- "I like what you said but that is not consistent with todays reading because ..."

- "But if what Polkinghorne says is true than both Poole and Brooke must be wrong when they said ..."

Things you can do in class that will get my attention and negative participation marks ...

- never refer to the readings but instead dominate discussion with personal assertions

- transcribe the class discussion as your journal entry for the reading (yes, I do see you doing that)

- put your head down on your journal with your eyes closed and drool

- deliberately sing the opening hymn off-key or to the tune of "Oh Canada"

Open Thread: Week 5 Revolution and Reformation

"In Chapter II we address a specific historical problem: The interpretation of those shifts in the understanding of nature that, during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, added up to what traditionally been called the Scientific Revolution." (p. 12)

"While it is true that investigations into nature were often subordinate to religious concerns in the late medieval period, it would be mis-leading to imply that they were bound together in am indissoluble complex until they were prized apart in the seventeenth century" (p. 12)

"It is even possible to argue that the scientific revolution saw an unprecedented fusion of science with theology, resulting in more secular forms of piety" (p. 53)

"A reverence for antiquity, though an appropriate stance for theology, was inappropriate for natural philosophy where reason and the senses held sway" (p. 56)

"Strictly speaking, it was impossible to effect a fusion of Christianity with Aristotle - as Aquinas was well aware. In selecting those facets of Aristotle's teaching that he considered illuminating, he was guided by the demands of his faith" (p. 60)

"The problem is, however, that real history rarely conforms to later stereotypes." (p. 64)

"Protestant critics, looking for a religion denuded of magic, would enlist the Bible on their side" (p. 71)

"The search for signs of God in nature had often been based on the assumption that the two books had been written in essentially the same language." (p. 77)

"They imply an earlier fusion, when it is more accurate to speak of subordination. And they imply divorce when what was achieved in the seventeenth century was a differentiation often conducted on theological grounds" (p. 81)

"In Chapter III we raise the question whether parallels can be drawn between the the reform of learning through experimental science and the reform of religion that occurred through the Protestant Reformation" (p. 12)

"While there is circumstantial evidence to suggest that certain Protestant societies were more tolerant toward new scientific learning, the difficulties that arise in testing such generalizations can be formidable." (p. 12)

"If Protestantism was more conducive that Catholicism to the expansion of science, one would expect this to manifest itself in a greater receptivity toward new and controversial ideas" (p. 83)

"True wisdom recognised the limitations of knowledge" (p. 87)

"Calvin's theology, no less than Luther's, illustrates that same capacity within Christianity for self-criticism and renewal" (p. 95)

"Whereas academic philosophers with a vested interest in preserving the Aristotelian world-picture were united against Galileo, there was no such unanimity among his clerical contacts, some of whom gave constructive advice." (p. 101)

"Put another way, puritan values helped to create an audience receptive to programs for the improvement of man's estate." (p. 111)

"The idea of a correlation between a latitudinarian and a scientific mentality can be appealing. They could be bound together by the belief, found in Bacon, that religious controversies were an impediment to science. There could be a suspicion of dogma, whether religious or scientific." (p. 115)

Not a Breakfast Club

"What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the Church of God and humiliate those that have nothing?"

"If anyone is hungry, let him eat at home"
I Corinthians 11 : v. 22 and v. 34.

I am well aware that my courses this semester are early in the morning. I live with my wife, three teenage boys and a dog. We have one bathroom. The logistics involved in getting us all out the door to jobs and school before 8:00 AM are considerable. But every morning we get it done one way or the other.

I understand that stealing some time in the morning by eating in my class seems to be a perfect solution to the time crunch but it has become so common and, to tell the truth, so distracting because of the nature of some of the breakfasts that are coming to class that I am going to have to shut it all down. No more eating in my classes. I am tired of the rustling, crackling, masticating and non-hydrogenated diary bi-product spreading. In one class recently I looked up to see almost half the class masticating openly with dreamy far-away looks. There will be no dreamy far-away looks in my class. No, I want you startled and attentive. On the other hand you are welcome to continue to bring beverages into class. And yes, I am serious about this, students that bring breakfast to class will be asked to leave. If I was able to persuade the football players at Saint Mary's University not to eat in my early morning classes then I can do the same with you.

Term Paper Focus: Time to Register

There was something that I forgot to take care of this morning. We were supposed to choose our focus for the term paper on "The Creation". In broad strokes the intention is that after you have read "The Creation" you should choose in what manner you would like to take a whack at the book. For example:

- from a Biology perspective you could find references that are critical of the authors facts or analysis on the perils facing biodiversity and global environmental issues.

- from a Theology perspective you could try to find the authors position in terms of existing theological thought and discuss how it stands up to critical/biblical analysis.

- from a Philosophical position on the relationship of Faith and Science one could determine the authors position and check it for consistency within his own writings and within in his own academic community.

- if you can find different critical position to analyze the text you are welcome to propose a term paper focus. We had already had one student sign-up for addressing the text from a Historical perspective.

That consistency point is a good one, it would be interesting to see if the authors position (biologically, theologically, philosophically etc.) is a new one (both Carl Sagan and Stephen Jay Gould faced a long slide into death and in that period of their lives both wrote books similar to this one).

It is time to choose. I will not allow more than four students to sign up for the same focus. You can sign up in the comments section of this posting (you do not need to leave your name just your ABU student number.

Open Thread: Week 4 History is not Simple

"An ounce of scientific knowledge could be more effective in controlling the forces of nature than any amount of supplication."

"The popular antithesis between science, conceived as a body of unassailable facts, and religion, conceived as a set of unverifiable beliefs, is assuredly simplistic."

"Sprat suggested that, of all pursuits, the study of experimental philosophy was most likely to engender a spirit of piety, perseverance, and humility - the hallmarks of Christian virtue." (Author's commentary on T. Sprat "History of the Royal Society", 1667)

"Certainly the Catholic Church had a vested interest in Aristotelian philosophy, but in much of the conflict ostensibly between science and religion turns out to have been between new science and the sanctified science of the previous generation."

"The fundamental weakness of the conflict thesis is its tendency to portray science and religion as hypostatized forces, as entities in themselves"

"Apologists wishing to stress the harmony between science and religion may gloss over those facets of Christianity as it was that distinguished it from Christianity as they now wish it to be."

"For the cynic will always say that the scientist of the past simply feigned their belief in order to escape persecution."

"The purpose of this chapter has been to establish three propositions: that religious beliefs have penetrated scientific discussion on many levels, that to reduce the relationship between science and religion to one of conflict is therefore inadequate, but to construct a revisionist history for apologetic purposes would be just as problematic."

Prof. H ... So how do you generate a weekly journal mark?

Well, I am pretty much bound by the syllabus on this one. I read the submitted selection and assign +/0/- marks (+ better than average, 0 average, and - poorer than average) on my assessment of:
- how well what was submitted conforms to the form and format detailed in the syllabus
- content and completeness
- utility (how useful will the submitted journal be when the student has a final exam and needs to use the journal as a reference for the source material).

I then make overall assessments

Generally if I am convinced that the student read and understood the source then the student will get 5/10 just for that. The other elements: form/format and content will pretty much give the remainder of the mark.

The journals from week 1 were marked Thursday but I forgot to pass them back (and in fact I was hoping that some missing journal selections would be coming in). My overall reflections on what has been submitted so far:

- please refer to the syllabus for form and format requirements
- there seems to be an issue concerning content. In a summary that is faithful to the source material I was expecting a) points made by the source b) logic and narrative (how were the points in the source connected) and c) globally key concepts and expressions. It would appear that a significant number of you are going straight to c) and in the process have caused a problem with differentiation of the positions contained in the source and your own interpretation. The danger in this is that it may be difficult in the final exam to recover what the actual source was saying.
- some of you have chosen an essay / paragraph style of summary that does indeed show that you read and understood the source but really ... how useful will that be in the final exam when you are going to be trying to find something from the source quickly? I mean, are you going to read your whole journal to find what you are looking for? On the utility question I think you need some running titles and structure to your summaries so that you can quickly go the to points in the source that you are looking for.
- there is an issue with quotes and some of you need to make sure of the source of the quotes that you select.
- discrimination is a point as well. You can report the line of argument from a source but if you give equal space to an example that the source used it shows that you are giving too much emphasis on secondary content.
- a diagram is a diagram not a scan of a page from the source.

Prof. H ... So how do you generate a weekly subjective evaluation mark?

Good question.

After each RS 3853 lecture I go over my notes and assign marks for each student based on attendance / attention, participation and quality of participation.

So far (and I may tweek this as I go along this semester) this has been:
attendance / attention out of 4
participation out of 3
quality out of 3

So the total weekly sub. eval. mark is out of 10.

This means that an average student that attends class (on time), pays attention and makes some contribution to class is most likely to get 4 + 1.5 + 1.5 = 7/10. That is pretty much how I have done it so far. Students that make online contributions will get marks added to the global subjective evaluation based on the last two criteria.

Found this interesting

I checked my old files and pulled out this obituary for Francis Crick and there was an interesting insight towards the end about the relationship between Rosalyn Franklin and the Cricks towards the end of her life. You might find it interesting also.

Link to Globe and Mail Obituary for Francis Crick

Open Thread: Week 3 Mind and Method

So this week was about the method and philosophy of Science. To look at these issues we focussed on the sterile definitions of the Wikipedia citations and the raw emotion of the methods and philosophies in conflict as portrayed in the video "The Race for the Double Helix" mostly confirmed by the NOVA documemtary "The Secret of Photo 51". We saw revealed a number of methods of doing scientific work but the conflict was a result of the Baconian (inductive) or Cartesian (deductive) philosophy that worked in each scientist.

I made reference to a phrase (it sounds better in the original Klingon):

"Science knows only one commandment: contribute to Science"
Bertolt Brecht

Open Thread: Week 2 Poole

Our discussions this week focused on Michael Poole's short book "Science and Belief". It allowed us to discuss the general range of topics that are part of the Faith and Science discussion.

There were several points where comments were made that the bias of Poole was showing and it is important to a) detect author bias and b) to be able to NOT condemn a position that you may not agree with. It was suggested that Poole appears to be a theistic evolutionist and if you strongly feel that is a wrong position then it can stop your ears to the logic that the author is attempting to create.

As the quote on my door says:

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" Aristotle

Open Thread: Lecture 1 Paul and Elder / Water

Post lecture comments re:

1) Paul and Elder "Critical Thinking"
2) Water "Bible and Science"

This is an open thread giving students an opportunity to contribute to the class discussion. Students that have comments on the material covered in the lecture or have come across any references that may be related to the topics discussed (related online links, journal / magazine articles etc.) should create an anonymous Blogger ID and make their comments here. For some students that prefer to not contribute to class discussion this may be the only way that they will be able to reach a passing mark for the 20% subjective evaluation.

Current Topics: Our Discussion on Art

We were discussing this morning our thoughts about the nature of art and if we could analyze art to the point of determining the intent of the artist. I happened upon this link that is tangentially linked to what we were discussing. It makes an interesting assertion about inevitable discovery in Science (as if all true things in Science will inevitably be discovered) thus making Science unique and separate from artistic thought (including beauty, insight and emotion).

Link to article