Paul Wallace wrote recently in Religion Dispatches, in a piece titled "Top Ten Peacemakers in the Science-Religion Wars," that 2011 is the "beginning of the end of the war between science and religion."
"Creationism," he says, "cannot last." And the so-called "new" atheists on the other end of the spectrum are not only not new any longer -- if they ever were new in the first place -- they are "getting old." Wallace looks hopefully for an expansion of the "middle ground" where science and religion co-exist in harmony. The outliers that oppose this harmony, he says, "continue to wage battle but they look increasingly irrelevant."
The article goes on to identify 10 people who have "helped to spread seeds of peace on the blasted-out battleground of science and religion." (I was flattered to make Wallace's list, coming in just two notches below Jon Stewart, who made the list because of a hilarious three-minute clip lampooning an atheist lawsuit to prevent a religious symbol from being erected at ground zero.)
I hope that Wallace continues his annual list but I would like to add an additional category: The Lifetime Achievement Award for making peace between science and religion. And for 2011, that award should go to John Polkinghorne, who has emerged in recent years as arguably the most significant Christian since C.S. Lewis.
Lewis was an important Christian for two reasons: He was clearly brilliant, undermining the argument that Christianity is a religion that only works for simpletons. He had, in fact, experience a celebrated conversion to Christianity from "old" atheism. And Lewis had something valuable to say. His books are still being read and studied and his classic "Chronicles of Narnia" stories are just now being given the full treatment on the big screen.
Polkinghorne wears similar shoes. He began his career as a British mathematical physicist and worked in theoretical particle physics for 25 years, making important contributions to our understanding of quarks, the basic building blocks of matter. I should add that, in the pecking order of science, mathematical physics is at the top. It is the discipline that explores the deepest and most fundamental questions in science. Newton, Einstein and Hawking all made their reputations as mathematical physicists.
In 1979, however, Polkinghorne stunned his physics peers by resigning his prestigious chair of mathematics at Cambridge University to become an Anglican priest, which he did in 1982. And he served for several years in the tiny parish of Blean -- population 3,000 -- visiting local townsfolk and becoming the spiritual leader of that small community. Every Sunday he administered the sacraments in a modest 13th-century church located in the long shadow of the famous cathedral at Canterbury where Thomas Becket was murdered. At no point did he find his celebration of the Eucharist every Sunday to be incompatible with the equations he once derived to describe quarks. In fact, Polkinghorne's entire life could be described as something of a double helix, with religion and science entwining, constantly make contact and often providing mutual support.
For the past three decades Polkinghorne has been an enduring symbol of the compatibility of science and faith. In his role as an ambassador joining these two worlds he has written more than thirty books, delivered the Gifford Lectures, been knighted by the Queen, debated with leading atheists like Nobel Laureate Steven Weinberg, and won the 2002 Templeton Prize. He has been a continuing presence in the science-and-religion conversation, always cautioning of the dangers of taking extreme positions on either end of the spectrum. I have personally encountered him in many of these venues, from Oxford University and the Venice Institute for Arts and Letters, to Gordon College on Boston's North Shore where he helped me launch the Forum on Faith and Science a few years ago.
A few months ago Dean Nelson and I published the first biography of Polkinghorne, "Quantum Leap: How John Polkinghorne Found God in Science and Religion." What struck us as we worked on that project -- and the theme we developed in the book -- was the remarkable unity of Polkinghorne's worldview and the many points of contact between his science and his faith. His deep understanding of the elegant rationality of the laws of physics is supported by his belief that those laws are not simply random features of the universe: They originated in the mind of God. At the same time, those very laws serve as a pointer to God. In particular, their ability to generate a universe friendly to life suggests that there may be a purpose to our existence.
Polkinghorne, now in his 80s, admits that faith is complex and filled with paradox. But so is science he notes, as quantum mechanics has shown so clearly. His own faith acknowledges the legitimacy of doubt and he understands why some cannot believe. But for him, it all fits together in a way that he sometimes describes as "too good to be true." His Christian belief ties everything together. "I have never thought," he told us, that "the universe was a tale told by an idiot."
Follow Karl Giberson, Ph.D on Twitter: www.twitter.com/gibersok
The book "Spiritual Evolution: How Science Redefines Our Existence" takes a close look at this definition and opens up the possibility that science may in fact be beginning to unmask some evidence of a spiritual existence. Does that imply that there is definitive proof of a Zeus-like figurehead overseeing the who of creation, not likely. Mounting studies in this area suggest that spirituality is more likely tied with a conscious sense of connectedness and awareness beyond yourself.
For example, Global Consciousness studies have shown that when mass groups of people pay attention to, or are aware of, a significant event (e.g. 911, the Olympics, etc.) that the measured randomness in globally placed random number generators (RNGs) shifts to a more ordered state. This is a scientifically measured effect with no current scientific theory to explain why this occurs. Many more examples and respective insights are covered in the book. Ultimately, the goal is to try to create a model that integrates what science and spiritual practice has to offer as long as there is logic and evidence to back it up.
It's unpublished. An amazing number of agents heard the synopsis and basically ran screaming from something so controversial written by an unknown.
If everyone in the entire world was an atheist then there would be no "special" feelings derived from a lack of belief. Atheists need there to be believers in order to have that self-identification that gives value to their existence.
Therefore, the "war" will continue between Science and Relgion not due to scientists...but, due to atheists who find it necessary and comforting. I know they will argue that they only want to educate the ignorant. But, this is just an excuse for self-glorification.
This was an excellent article written by Dr. Karl Giberson.
Having said that... I can see a lot of people who are much smaller. Especially those who have no clue about the thinking of atheists.
Metaphysics in general is the categorical study of the natural world as it relates to man's experience of it as living conscious beings. At its core metaphysics is about the existential questions related to life experience and the apparent death of consciousness.
What overlap there is generally relates to perspectives on cosmology, and this appears to be what most people are arguing over when it comes to the religion vs science debate, despite neither having a truly convincing position on the matter frankly.
I find the intransigence on both sides endlessly annoying, as frankly, there doesn't need to be such conflict. Both sides are over reaching their position, and it's fairly obvious upon even casual examination.
It's the fact that the truth is so close and so easily observed that worries them. Cosmology they can wipe off the table easily... but adaptation by selection... not so much. Everybody who has a dog at home, has a product of that principle as man's best friend.
Practical Scientists try to answer the question `What happens in the real world` and `Indifferent Scientists such as the Engineers or the Molecular Biologists` make use of these answers to build machines, to bring out the computer revolution and the biological revolution.
Bothered Scientists try to answer the question ` How it happens` and in the process find more answers to the `What happens` question, which in turn are passed on to the Indifferent Scientists and the technological revolutions continue.
Deeply Bothered Scientists try to answer the question `Why it happens`, and so does Religion.
DBS say that there is an Anthropic Principle that assigns the constants of nature such values that will enable consciousnesses to emerge and theoretical physicists to arrive and understand the universe, including the understanding that at no stage .. not even the big bang stage .. was the performance of the universe made to empty stalls.
Religion of the type `R1` - the conflicting type - says it is not in the domain of Scientists to answer the `Why it happens` type of questions.
Religion of the type `R2` - the understanding type – says that Science and Religion must be complimentary and on common ground while understanding reality, the former by experiment and observation and the latter by intuition, and both by accepting the truths already established by science.
Then there is the law of probability that will decide where the road will take us
Religion and science are antithetical. Science explores the unknown; searches for the most probably solutions. Religion assumes a solution. They are not at all compatible and never will be.
To say otherwise is only proof of one thing... you have never worked in a lab and you never had a metaphysical discussion with a scientist... at the level of THEIR understanding.
Scientists such as:
Einstein and his ideas on `Cosmic religious feeling` and his views based on his strictly deterministic idea that a serious understanding of the laws of causation is required to understand the history of religious thought…. Ref `Ideas and opinions`
Schrodinger`s views on the `Oneness of mind`…. Ref `What is life and Mind and matter`
Paul Davies` understanding that there is no religion that does not teach that `God is a mind`.
…… And many others…
And above all Stephen Hawking`s deeply bothered view that the next couple of centuries can see the collapse of human civilization – curtsy population explosion and imminent nuclear wars - and our only hope for survival is to colonize the galaxy before that happens.
But that’s a tall, in fact a very tall order….. The only hope is that …. Good sense must prevail… The rising population trend must reverse…. Which requires peaceful coexistence … Which requires conflicts between nations to end … Which requires Science and religion to converge.
Indeed we must be deeply bothered…. The `Why` type questions can wait… there will be ample time for that… first priority is to survive the danger zone.
Those of faith pray that there will be no tornado, those who trust that there will be, build shelters and early warning systems.
Hmmm... three little pigs come to mind.
The are plenty of theists who are also followers of science. Take Galileo for example:
"...I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use..."
"...Nature … is inexorable and immutable; she never transgresses the laws imposed upon her, or cares a whit whether her abstruse reasons and methods of operation are understandable to men. For that reason it appears that nothing physical which sense–experience sets before our eyes, or which necessary demonstrations prove to us, ought to be called in question (much less condemned) upon the testimony of biblical passages which may have some different meaning beneath their words. For the Bible is not chained in every expression to conditions as strict as those which govern all physical effects; nor is God any less excellently revealed in Nature's actions than in the sacred statements of the Bible..."
On the other hand, theists which take one step back from any interpretation of the bible that contradicts reality have a long way to go backwards before science will be finished exploring the world.
It's a no-win. The difference is merely how foolish you want to look as a group while arriving at the very same conclusions that take atheists 8-14 years of their young lives to come to...
After all, if one wants to promote a controversy (and call it a "war"), it's in HuffPo's and Giberson's advantage to draw in those who might ignore it otherwise... The more participants, the better.........
So you can never trust the bible, you can only have faith in it. But you should never have faith in a structural engineer, instead, make sure that you can trust him.
People speak of trusting without verification. If you trust the structural engineer to be certified as her letterhead claims, without checking her credentials, and act on her advice without getting a second opinion, then you have trusted, or maybe even had faith in, her.
I would suggest that the real difference is that you CAN verify the trust you have given to the engineer, by calling the manager of her last project, or stress testing the completed work. However, you simply cannot verify the faith in a religious sense - `the burning bush promised me'.
I prefer the term Spirituallity. Spirituallity does not require all of the dogma and belief systems imposed by Religion.
Two of the prerequisites of Science is that it deals with things that are observable and testable. Under this limitation, String Theory, with it's predictions of 11 dimensions, is pushing the bounds of Science towards Spirituallity. But, since we are limited to the observable 4 dimensions (three physical dimensions and time), we may need spirituallity to answer some of the questions that Science cannot answer.
If there is a Spiritual world, (and I believe there is), Science will have to devise better tests and methods of observation to detect those other 7 dimensions.
"Two of the prerequisites of Science is that it deals with things that are observable and testable. Under this limitation, String Theory, with it's predictions of 11 dimensions, is pushing the bounds of Science towards Spirituallity"
Wrong. Some aspects of string theory are not testable -- YET. This is nothing new in science. Decades passed between the time Einstein first published some of his theories, and the time when they were first tested by experiments.
"Science will have to devise better tests and methods of observation to detect those other 7 dimensions."
Do you not understand that scientists are working on exactly that?
...things not provable at this time, may be in the future...in Eastern religious thought, there was the idea of "vibration"...and now science points to everything as vibration.
To me, the bible stories I learned as a child was for moral teaching, not necessarily "fact.".....like the American Indian tales to explain the beginning of our world and to give moral guidance.
Science deals with observation and is as factual as we can get until we gain more observable knowledge which sets us farther along in our understanding...sometimes on a totally different path.
Having said that, string theory could still turn into a model and it could still become a theory and it could even become the theory of everything if it actually describes nature correctly (and it is only the lacking solution theory that stop us from checking that).
But the garden of Eden and talking snakes and virgin births... those will never even turn into a hypothesis.
Spirit abiding in us if we accept the work the Lord Jesus did for us (die for our sins and rise again from the dead). But that's too hard or unappealing for most because it is our human nature to absolutely love to sin.
One more point for those who have "faith": Don't die. Dead people don't enter the kingdom of God. God is not the God of the dead, he is the God of the living, of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (aka Israel). For those whose religion is science (but who couldn't tell me what the basic methodology of science is): Watch what's going on in Israel and Jerusalem. These are God's prophetic guide posts.
He was. It's Marie we should admire. She's the only woman who got away with such a big lie. And Joseph is the most gullible guy ever.
I personally know a few women whom you apparently can't imagine.
I will now let you go back to having faith in your level of knowledge... but please don't ask me to trust it, because that would require actual evidence.
If the conflict between science and religion has become more peaceful in recent years, it is only because organized religion no longer has the authority, at least in the western world, to throw scientists in prison or tie them to a stake and set them on fire - which is what they have and would do should they ever regain such authority. Go argue science versus religion in Saudi Arabia and see where that gets you. In the same way, political systems that once oppressed the religious, such as the now-dead Soviet state, no longer hold sway. Keeping political authority away from religion, and religious authority away from politics is the only reasonable way forward.