Monday, February 26, 2007

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)

Friday, February 16, 2007

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)

Tuesday, February 13, 2007

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.

Thursday, February 1, 2007

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."