Here Gould threatens a ‘knuckle-rapping’ to both theists and atheists who would try to use science (in general) or the theory of evolution by natural selection (in particular) to butress their worldview.
People familiar with Gould will detect the scent of N.O.M.A. (Nonoverlapping Magesteria – don’t ask me why it’s not N.M. or N.O.M.) in this, but it still seems to make some good points… Continue reading “gould: science a natural venture”
1a (or ‘1’). How should it be defined?
1b (or ‘2’). Is ‘science’ inherently ‘naturalistic’? If so why?
1c (or ‘3’). What is the relationship between philosophy and science?
With expectations low (but not low enough to keep us away!), Damian and I headed to the debate (link to series here) tonight between William Lane Craig and Bill Cooke.
I think we both left having heard little or nothing we hadn’t heard before, but nonetheless having enjoyed watching it all unfold.
What follows is not a full, detailed review of the debate, but (in all truthfulness) rather various impressions I’ll share (on my way to bed)… Continue reading “craig cooke debate: impressions”
Many books are on my desk at the moment. Books for my theological study, and books for my personal interest. I have too many books on my desk. I cannot read them all…
Yet this did not prevent me from picking up 7 more books on our recent trip to the states… Continue reading “recent book purchase”
This just in…
* * *
The Tertiary Students Christian Fellowship
The New Zealand Association of Rationalists and Humanists
present a debate between
Atheist Historian *Bill Cooke*
Christian Philosopher *William Lane Craig.*
Adjudicated by *John Bishop*, head of Philosophy Department, Auckland University.
*Moot: Is God a Delusion?*
7PM, Tuesday the 17th of June 2008
Lecture Theatre OGGB5, 12 Grafton Road, Auckland University
* * *
Of course, this kind of thing is only one of hundreds of its kind. The apparent -or ‘felt’- ‘winning’ of either ‘side’ will not, of course, be (directly or indirectly) indicative of the superiority of that position. Debates are like that. But it will be entertaining, interesting and a better use of time than watching most of the nonsense which will be on television at the same time (not that I watch much television anyway). So do come.
Guy Consolmagno SJ has posted his fourth and final article for Thinking Faith.
This one I thoroughly enjoyed. Not only does his faith come through clearly, but his love and passion for science is a delight.
In this article, he explores current thoughts as to where our universe might be headed, and specifically how it might ‘end’. He ends with a consideration of the Christian idea of life after death, by way of the soul-as-software metaphor.
If you love thinking about cosmology and religion, you’ll love this article…
I’m a little mad at him, though; because now I’m going to HAVE to purchase his book: “God’s Mechanics: How Scientists and Engineers Make Sense of Religion”, and I’ve got enough books to read at the moment!
I’ve enjoyed the few articles I’ve skimmed at this blog called “Just Thomism”.
(Thomism designates the study of the life and work of St. Thomas Aquinas)
I found this post having to do with atheism, theism, evolution and science(s) of particular interest.
Here’s a quote…
It is mere historical chance that popular theism did not end up insisting that God could only exist in an evolutionary world, where all matter had been developing to the point where man could emerge at last- At last! man! prepared for by all the ages! Who all creation leads up to, just as it says in the book of Genesis!
This is one of many interesting philosophical reflections (and certainly not necessarily the best) in basically each and every post. We often don’t think about how we think; observe how we observe; ponder how we ponder; distinguish how we distinguish; wonder how we wonder; know how we know; ‘etc.’ how we ‘etc.’
Happy browsing… (and thinking)
This question (‘Is anything significant?’) can be fleshed out a bit…
We could ask, “Is everything equally in-significant?”, or we could ask, “Is everything equally highly-significant?”
What makes something (an event or object [which can quite rightly be said to be ‘events’ in themselves]) significant, and another thing not so?
Continue reading “is anything significant?”
There are a few, perhaps, who would answer this question with a casual (or insistent) “None. Get over it”, but most, I suspect, would agree: porn (obviously only for societies that have it) is a problem.
Some better questions would be ‘what kind of problem is it?’, ‘where does it come from?’ and ‘how do people deal with it?’
Jason Byassee has written an interesting article over at ‘First Things’ website. He refers to a book by Pamela Paul, ‘Pornified: How Pornography Is Transforming Our Lives, Our Relationships, and Our Families’, whose Times article titled ‘The Porn Factor’ begins with this synopsis of a ‘Friends’ episode: Continue reading “what’s the problem with porn?”
Consolmagno has done it again…
Yet another poignant and wise article, helpfully navigating the intersection of faith and science…
Here’s a sampler:
…there’s the world of nature, the world I study as a scientist, nice and neat and well described by some beautiful equations, elegant in their simplicity. And there’s the world of human beings, strange fleshy bundles of ego and free will, who can sometimes be described in a statistical sense but who as individuals never cease to surprise you.
Read the whole thing here.