With Mike Keas:
Are Christianity and science at war? Historian of science Michael Keas busts the stereotypes as he explores the historical relationship between Christianity and science, discussing three key ways Christian theology supported the development of modern science. Dr. Keas is author of the book Unbelievable: 7 Myths about the History and Future of Science and Religion, and a senior fellow with Discovery Institute’s Center for Science & Culture.
Mike Keas is the author of Unbelievable: 7 Myths About the History and Future of Science and Religion See also: AI as an emergent religion. Science philosopher Mike Keas’s new book discusses how AI and ET are merging, to create a religion of futurist magic.
The troubling part is that many sources won’t talk about this stuff because it is “religious” but they don’t mind parroting some flapdoodle from a village atheist, of whom it might be said that to call him merely ill-informed would be to shower him with unearned praise.
Also: Galileo’s contemporary science opponents made a lot of sense Christopher Graney: “… seen from Earth, stars appear as dots of certain sizes or magnitudes. The only way stars could be so incredibly distant and have such sizes was if they were all incredibly huge, every last one dwarfing the Sun. Tycho Brahe, the most prominent astronomer of the era and a favourite of the Establishment, thought this was absurd, … ” The true history is a warning to thoughtful people to avoid popular science written by the village atheist; he knows just enough to get it all wrong.
Hat tip: Philip Cunningham
Not only was science born out of Christian presuppositions,
Not only was science born out of Christian presuppositions, but science also finds its ultimate resolution for the quote unquote ‘theory of everything’ in Christ’s Resurrection from the dead.
Namely, allowing the Agent causality of God ‘back’ into physics, as the Christian founders of modern science originally envisioned,,,, (Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday, James Clerk Maxwell, and Max Planck, to name a few of the Christian founders),,, and as quantum mechanics itself now empirically demands (with the closing of the free will loophole by Anton Zeilinger and company), rightly allowing the Agent causality of God ‘back’ into physics provides us with a very plausible resolution for the much sought after ‘theory of everything’ in that Christ’s resurrection from the dead provides an empirically backed reconciliation, via the Shroud of Turin, between quantum mechanics and general relativity into the much sought after ‘Theory of Everything”. Here are a few posts where I lay out and defend some of the evidence for that claim:
To give us a small glimpse of the power that was involved in Christ’s resurrection from the dead, the following recent article found that, ”it would take 34 Thousand Billion Watts of VUV radiations to make the image on the shroud. This output of electromagnetic energy remains beyond human technology.”
Verse:
Yes, you can make a good case that contemporary science was fostered in Christian Europe but for the faith to claim sole authorship is blatant hubris.
There is plenty of evidence for the antecedents of modern science to be found in other cultures that either preceded the onset of Christianity or, although contemporary, were denied its evident benefits through geographical separation.
Conflicts between science and religion can arise where both make claims about some aspect of the natural world which are either divergent or contradictory. One example, discussed in another thread is the claim that quantum phenomena can be interpreted to support religious claims, such as the existence of the Christian God or souls. In most if not all cases, this is neither the intention of the researchers quoted nor is such an interpretation necessarily the only possible and authoritative one as is sometimes implied. Moreover, these positions are being advanced either by lay-persons or by scholars who have no expertise and hence no authority in that particular field.
I wonder if Seversky considers Zeilinger, who is one of the top experimentalists in Quantum Mechanics in the world, with many breakthroughs under his belt, to be a sufficient enough ‘authority’ in quantum mechanics’?
further note on Zeilinger:
If Anton Zeilinger is not a sufficiently high enough authority for Seversky, perhaps the founders of Quantum Mechanics itself may be sufficiently high enough to convince him that his materialistic worldview cannot possibly be true?
Bonus quote from Planck:
Seversky:
There is plenty of evidence for the antecedents of modern science to be found in other cultures that either preceded the onset of Christianity
Really. Then why is it that the forking of science from philosophy (of course with philosophical setting of rules) can be said to have begun with Franci Bacon? You don’t even have to read the Wiki article, but trust me, he laid out the foundations of empiricism guided by inductive reasoning. And, too bad for Seversky but Bacon was a devout Anglican.
One example, discussed in another thread is the claim that quantum phenomena can be interpreted to support religious claims, such as the existence of the Christian God or souls.
Oh yeah? excuse me but many physicists believe their work has implications for the truth of a mystical world view, and I’ll just name one: Werner Heisenberg. A materialist view of human existence is pretty much obliterated by this experiential realm and which is supported by the currently unfolding revolution in psychedelic clinical research. Read Michael Pollan: How To Change Your Mind (400 pp) for a taste of this fascinating field. Also Fred Hoyle who could not eschew materialism (while living) got this insight when probing into the physics of elemental creation in stars, as if a superintellect had “monkeyed with” the processes revealed by the physics: http://philsci-archive.pitt.ed.....haphil.pdf
Geez Louise the DJIA is down 12% more right now.
Here is the second video in the series from Mike Keas:
Sev:
Strawman alert: “for the faith to claim sole authorship”
Who has said this?
Europeans of the mid 1500’s – 1700 would have studied Math from Euclid, Philosophy from Plato and Aristotle, Logic from Aristotle, used Latin language, calculated Astronomy using the Chaldean sexagesimal system, and more. Those from Charlemagne’s era on would have been similar, save that until Aristotle was translated they would not have known his corpus. Our civilisation grows out of the Christian synthesis of Jerusalem, Athens and Rome, with the river valley civilisations of the fertile crescent behind them.
The key contribution (apart from sponsorship of scholarship and foundation of universities) was that there was a worldview and linked cultural context that gave high confidence in the intelligible rationality of a world created by One who is communicative reason himself. It is in this specific, unique context that Science as a major, cumulative cultural enterprise had its roots and began to bear transformative fruit.
KF
PS: Dan Peterson in Am Spec:
“The Genesis of Science” – James Hannum, is a good book on the subject.