Neuroscientist Christof Koch was troubled as a child by the Catholic tradition that dogs like his beloved Purzel did not go to heaven. Ironically, human exceptionalism, which Koch decries, holds out the possibility that some beloved animals may indeed share immortality with humans.
Asked at Aeon, “Are we part of a dying reality or a blip in eternity? The value of the Hubble Constant could tell us which terror awaits.”
Bet on them all being wrong. That’s probably the only thing that has happened lots of times before.
To summarize Scientism of the Gaps: No mountain too high, no river so wide that sheer chaos cannot contrive to create an inextricably interlinked system that seamlessly navigates it. Even though chaos never works that way in your own life, you must believe — if you are really science-friendly — that it works that way at the foundation of all of life, the entire universe and all that.
Let’s see what happens in China. This could be an important test of human exceptionalism.
Egnor: Neurotheology stamps a scientific imprimatur on the profoundly misguided doctrine that if you believe in God, if you observe the Sabbath, if you never fail to pray your rosary, your brain is better! Your frontal lobes get better blood flow, your hypothalamic neurotransmitters are better balanced, and your cerebellum is more finely tuned! But for what? A cerebral facelift?
Readers may recall Biologos as a theistic evolution confab, founded by, among others, genome mapper Francis Collins. Here’s both a podcast and transcript of an interview with Steve Meyer on The Return of the God Hypothesis. BioLogos Vice President Jim Stump is the host. There’s even a guide to the episode.
Feynman: These scientific views end in awe and mystery, lost at the edge in uncertainty, but they appear to be so deep and so impressive that the theory that it is all arranged simply as a stage for God to watch man’s struggle for good and evil seems to be inadequate.
Logic and evidence both point to the existence of God, whatever atheists may think: Michael Egnor addresses three arguments in Steve Meyer’s new book, The Return of the God Hypothesis.
Seminar leaders include James Tour, Alister McGrath, Fazale Rana, and Mike Keas.
Apparently, claims of that sort are not working out. Could these people try common sense before they go over a cliff?
Nathan Muse: Regarding faith and reason, McGrath does an excellent job showing how many of Dawkins’ arguments for atheism can easily be turned on their head to prove the opposite and that this actually tells the reader something about the meaning of life.
Actually, despite the article’s title, Einstein didn’t reconcile anything. He said different things at different times to different people. And it didn’t matter. People took what they wanted from it. It sounds as though he didn’t really have a firm opinion.
Burgess: Some of the biological elements called bad design are actually ones that systems engineers value quite a bit and use in their work frequently.
McLatchie: The problem with the word “extraordinary” here is that it is rarely clearly defined. The mantra that I would adopt instead is that all claims require sufficient evidence.
John Lennox is the Oxford mathematician who wrote 2084: Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Humanity (2020), among many other books. “The fascinating biopic tells the story of Lennox’s life defending the harmony between science and faith.”