Remember mathematician Jason Rosenhouse: Multiverse is a “done deal,” Occam’s razor doesn’t apply? Further to that (and noting in passing the new idea of dumping falsifability), Moshe Averick notes at The Times of Israel:
Jason Rosenhouse is a Professor of Mathematics at James Madison University in Harrisonburg, Virginia. In a recent post on Evolution Blog, Dr. Rosenhouse makes a rather astounding statement about the relationship between one’s views on human origins and the value one places on human life:
“Answers about our origins have no implications at all for questions of meaning and value. Arising through blind, uncaring forces in no way implies that life is not awesomely precious, and being made in the image of a transcendent designer in no way implies that it is.”
More. But that makes no sense. As Rabbi Averick points out:
Contrast this with the view of an Orthodox Rabbi such as myself: “Precious and beloved is man who was created in the image of God. Exceeding love was bestowed on him by being informed explicitly [in the Torah] that he was created in the image of God.” (Babylonian Talmud) The most revolutionary idea in the history of mankind was the Torah’s clear assertion that man was created in the image of the infinite, transcendent Creator of the universe, that he can transcend his own material existence and grasp, as it were, eternity. Finally, there was an escape from the degrading, chaotic world of pagan mythology. It also forms the basis of the American Revolution: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that all men have been endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights.” Let’s face it, any self-respecting atheist should choke on these words. He would claim that it is a violation of the separation clause of the Constitution to read the words of the Declaration of Independence in a public school! I hope that non-believers will not obfuscate the issue by citing parts of the Torah or Judaism that they disagree with or think are inhumane. Feel free to reject the rest of the Torah if you like – that discussion is for another time and place – the issue on the table is how one views the origin of human beings and the implications of such. More.
Reading this is interesting to me, your news writer, because the earliest non-family influence on my life was a child who suffered with Down syndrome (Johnny, 1948-1957). Search the Web for routine mockery of US Alaska governor Sarah Palin’s son, who lives with that genetic disorder.
Apparently, some people think that mockery is a normal reaction to that disorder. But is it at all likely that those same people believe that a given individual has the gifts or mission he or she does as a result of a greater plan?
No. I doubt it too. It is a form of practical atheism. It should be identified as such. Fine with me, I am a free speech journalist. But don’t let’s kid ourselves. Incidentally, recent influences on my own life have been seniors (80s/90s) with late life cognitive disorders, who nonetheless offer wisdom. It is all worth mature spiritual reflection in which direction Rabbi Averick wisely points. Much recommended is Moshe Averick’s book The Confused, Illusory World of the Atheist – O’Leary for News See also: String theory coming unstrung even among science writers?