Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

C S Lewis on The Magician’s Twin . . . a video critique of Scientism

arroba Email

Let me cross-post and adapt, in further following up on the Nye-Ham debate, through exploring and replying to the underlying problem of scientism . . . the ideologisation of science:


>> The following video critique of Scientism (science turned into ideology or quasi-religion and means of gaining power) based on C S Lewis’s thought, is worth a pause to watch and ponder:

[youtube FPeyJvXU68k]

Food for thought, especially as we further reflect on the Nye-Ham debate and its sobering implications. END Posted by at 6:30 am >>


Let us think carefully, lest we make the error of the sorcerer’s apprentice and let loose forces we cannot control. END

Some potpourri on the CS Lewis doodle 'Finding Shakespeare':
The God of the Mathematicians – Goldman Excerpt: As Gödel told Hao Wang, “Einstein’s religion [was] more abstract, like Spinoza and Indian philosophy. Spinoza’s god is less than a person; mine is more than a person; because God can play the role of a person.” Kurt Gödel – (Gödel is considered one of the greatest logicians who ever existed) http://www.firstthings.com/article/2010/07/the-god-of-the-mathematicians
At the 9:40 minute mark of the following video, C.S. Lewis comments on God 'playing the role of a person':
Finding Shakespeare by C.S. Lewis Doodle - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXlBCZ_5OYw
As well, Scripture speaks of Jesus being the 'author' of life and of our faith:
Acts 3:15 You killed the author of life, but God raised him from the dead. We are witnesses of this. Hebrews 12:2 looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.
All this 'author' talk in scripture, and this 'playing a role' talk by Kurt Godel and C.S. Lewis, has caught my interest because it is now found that reality, at its most foundational basis is 'information'
John Wheeler (1911–2008) summarizes his life in physics - February 2014 Excerpt: "I think of my lifetime in physics as divided into three periods. In the first period, extending from the beginning of my career until the early 1950?s, I was in the grip of the idea that Everything Is Particles. I was looking for ways to build all basic entities – neutrons, protons, mesons, and so on – out of the lightest, most fundamental particles, electrons, and photons. I call my second period Everything Is Fields. From the time I fell in love with general relativity and gravitation in 1952 until late in my career, I pursued the vision of a world made of fields, one in which the apparent particles are really manifestations of electric and magnetic fields, gravitational fields, and space-time itself. Now I am in the grip of a new vision, that Everything Is Information. The more I have pondered the mystery of the quantum and our strange ability to comprehend this world in which we live, the more I see possible fundamental roles for logic and information as the bedrock of physical theory." – J. A. Wheeler, K. Ford, Geons, Black Hole, & Quantum Foam: A Life in Physics New York W.W. Norton & Co, 1998, pp 63-64. https://uncommondesc.wpengine.com/informatics/john-wheeler-1911-2008-summarizes-his-life-in-physics/ Why the Quantum? It from Bit? A Participatory Universe? Excerpt: In conclusion, it may very well be said that information is the irreducible kernel from which everything else flows. Thence the question why nature appears quantized is simply a consequence of the fact that information itself is quantized by necessity. It might even be fair to observe that the concept that information is fundamental is very old knowledge of humanity, witness for example the beginning of gospel according to John: "In the beginning was the Word." Anton Zeilinger - a leading expert in quantum teleportation: http://www.metanexus.net/archive/ultimate_reality/zeilinger.pdf
And Wheeler’s and Zeilinger’s contention, that reality at its foundation is ‘information theoretic’, is pretty convincing since it is now shown that ‘material’ atoms can be reduced to quantum information and teleported. In fact, all the ‘material’ atoms of an entire human body can, theoretically, be reduced to quantum information and teleported to another position in the universe:
Quantum Teleportation of a Human? – video https://vimeo.com/75163272
Of related note in regards to reality found to be 'information', Ms. O’Leary (of UD News) has wisely noted previously:
“But information is fundamentally relational” & also “If information underlies the universe, then meaning underlies the universe. Pass it on.”
Thus, since information is ‘fundamentally relational’, and requires meaning to exist for information to exist in any 'meaningful' fashion, then this ‘relational’ fact for information provides an answer for why the universe coheres as a whole.
"If you have no God, then you have no design plan for the universe. You have no prexisting structure to the universe.,, As the ancient Greeks held, like Democritus and others, the universe is flux. It's just matter in motion. Now on that basis all you are confronted with is innumerable brute facts that are unrelated pieces of data. They have no meaningful connection to each other because there is no overall structure. There's no design plan. It's like my kids do 'join the dots' puzzles. It's just dots, but when you join the dots there is a structure, and a picture emerges. Well, the atheists is without that (final picture). There is no preestablished pattern (to connect the facts given atheism)." 13:20 minute mark - Pastor Joe Boot - Defending the Christian Faith – Pastor Joe Boot – video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqE5_ZOAnKo
In regards to this line of thought from Pastor Joe Boot, I highly recommend Wiker & Witt’s book “A Meaningful World” in which they show, using the “Methinks it is like a weasel” phrase that Dawkins’ used from Shakespeare’s play Hamlet, that the problem is much worse for Darwinists than just finding the “Methinks it is like a weasel” phrase by a blind search, since the “Methinks it is like a weasel” phrase doesn't makes any sense at all unless the entire play of Hamlet is taken into consideration so as to give the “Weasel” phrase a proper context. Moreover the context in which the phrase finds its meaning is derived from several different levels of the play. i.e. The ENTIRE play, and even the Elizabethan culture, provides meaning for the individual “Weasel” phrase.
A Meaningful World: How the Arts and Sciences Reveal the Genius of Nature – Book Review Excerpt: They focus instead on what “Methinks it is like a weasel” really means. In isolation, in fact, it means almost nothing. Who said it? Why? What does the “it” refer to? What does it reveal about the characters? How does it advance the plot? In the context of the entire play, and of Elizabethan culture, this brief line takes on significance of surprising depth. The whole is required to give meaning to the part. http://www.thinkingchristian.net/C228303755/E20060821202417/
In fact it is interesting to note what the overall context is for “Methinks it is like a weasel” that is used in the Hamlet play. The context in which the phrase is used is to illustrate the spineless nature of one of the characters of the play. To illustrate how easily the spineless character can be led to say anything that Hamlet wants him to say:
Ham. Do you see yonder cloud that ’s almost in shape of a camel? Pol. By the mass, and ’t is like a camel, indeed. Ham. Methinks it is like a weasel. Pol. It is backed like a weasel. Ham. Or like a whale? Pol. Very like a whale. http://www.bartleby.com/100/138.32.147.html
After realizing what the context of ‘Methinks it is like a weasel’ actually was, I remember thinking to myself that it was perhaps the worse possible phrase Dawkins could have possibly chosen to try to illustrate his point, since the phrase, when taken into context, actually illustrates that the person saying it (Hamlet) was manipulating the other character into saying a cloud looked like a weasel. Which I am sure is hardly the idea, i.e. deception and manipulation, that Dawkins was trying to convey with his ‘Weasel’ example. Verse and Music
John 1:1-3 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. Natasha Bedingfield - Unwritten http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFFBSSntZgs
Thanks, BA. Sobering stuff. G kairosfocus
Of related note: You may appreciate these kf Animated Apologetics: CS Lewis on Miracles, Science, and the Laws of Nature http://www.youtube.com/user/CSLewisDoodle/videos bornagain77
C S Lewis asked, in effect, whether (like the sorcerer's apprentice) we are borrowing the Magician's wand and ill advisedly setting loose forces that we cannot control. As we ponder the issues revealed by the underlying context of the Nye-Ham debate, let us also remember the issue and history of Scientism, which turns Science into a totalising ideology. KF kairosfocus

Leave a Reply