Key Issues between the Sciences

1
Key Issues between the Sciences the Religions

• PhD-Course at FOOD and FRS
• Copenhagen University November 27, 2007

2
Levels of InteractionWhat do We Want to Compare?

• RELIGION SCIENCE
• Comprehensive Distinctive
• Religious Worldviews Scientific
  Worldview(s)
• -------------------
• Theological Views Scientific Theories
  
• --------------------
• Religious Practices Scientific
  Knowhow
• in
  in
• Religious Communities Scientific
  Communities

3
1. FIELDS OF STUDY (1960ff)

• Relating Scientific Rel. Worldviews
• - Historically (diachronic perspective)
• - Sociologically (synchronic perspective
• BUT Do Religions have endemic Worldviews?
• (2) Comparing Methods in
• Science and Theology
• (e.g. metaphors, models, paradigms,
• testability, rational assessments)

4
1. FIELDS OF STUDY (cont.)

• (3) Physics Theology
• - Laws of Nature (Prescriptive or
  Descriptive,
• Deterministic or not?), Anthropic
  Principle vs.
• Multiverse, Implications of Quantum
  Mechanics,
• Relativistic Cosmology Block Universe?,
• Energy/Mass and Information?
• (4) Biology Theology
• - Creation and Evolution, Micro- and
  Macro-
• Evolution, DNA-Organisms-Groups, Death
  and
• Pain, Design vs Chance Uniqueness
  ofHumanity?
• OBS No laws of nature BUT resilient
  structures
• the identification of domain-specific
  causal capacities

5
1. FIELDS OF STUDY (Cont.)

• (5) Ecology
• e.g. relationality, systems view of nature
• ? Nutrition sciences?
• (6) Psychology
• e.g. religious experiences neurology,
  evolutionary psychology?, religious ideas
  cognitive science
• (7) Computer-aided Complexity Studies
• - e.g. the interplay of laws, causal
  capacities and general algorithmic rules
• self-organization, emergence theories

6
2. Unifying Visions Majority Positions in
Western Thought

• Monotheistic Presuppositions the
• Emergence of Scientific Rationality
• - e.g. John 1
• Scientism not Workable, but Positive Stance
• towards Science
• (3) Explanatory Reductionism not Workable between
  Levels, but Workable within Levels
• (4) Critical Realism in both Science Theology
• (5) Coherence Preferable to Conflict

7
3. Some Working Methodologies

• Two Language Approaches
• - e.g. Existentialism Pragmaticism
• (2) Scientific Metaphysical Explanation
• - e.g. Thomism
• (3) Coherence Theory
• - e.g. Nicholas Rescher
• (4) Lakatosian Theology
• - e.g. Nancey Murphy

8
4. PIONEERS SHAPING THE FIELD

• Ian Barbour, Issues in Science Religion,
• 1966 Religion in an Age of Science, 1990
• When Science Meets Religion, 2000
• Arthur Peacocke, Theology for a Scientific Age,
• 1990 Paths from Science towards God, 2001.
• John Polkinghorne (multiple volumes)
• Holmes Rolston, Genes, Genesis, and God, 2001.

9
5. Neighboring Disciplines

• History of Science (History of Religion?)
• Sociology of Religion Science Studies
• Philosophy
• A Clarifying Bridging Concepts
• - e.g. types of causality reductionism
  and
• holism emergence explanation from
• physics to theology self-organization
• autopoiesis
• B Criteria for Rational Judgments
• Falsification, Coherence, Inference to the
  best explananation

10
6. Curricula Chairs

• Masters Degrees in Science Religion
• - e.g. Oxford, Cambridge
• 2. Integrated in PhD Graduate Programs
• - e.g. Berkeley (CTNS), Princeton (PTS),
• Chicago Lutheran School (Zygon Center)
• 3. Endowed Chairs in Oxford, Cambridge,
• Princeton, Davidson College
• around 5-10 other positions
  

11
7. Centers Societies

• (1) Centres
• Zygon Center, Chicago (ca. 1965), Center for
  Theology and the Natural Sciences (CTNS),
  Berkeley, (1987) Ian Ramsey Center, Oxford
  University (ca. 1970)
• 
  some 10 other centres
• (2) Societies
• The Danish Science-Religion Forum, Aarhus
  (1980),
• local and national fora in
  many other countries,
• also in Africa, Asia,
  Australia
• Forum for Science Existence, Copenhagen
  University
• European Society for the Study of Science and
  Theology (ESSSAT), 1986.
• International Society for Science Religion
  (ISSR),
• 2002.

12
Future Tasks

• Inclusion of non-Western Religions and
• Multifaith Perspectives
• 2. Extending the Discussion to New Areas of
  Contact between the Sciences and the Religions
  (e.g. computer sciences, engineering, nutrition
  sciences etc.)
• 3. Moving Intellectually from Generalization to
  Specialization

13
8. Journals

• Zygon Journal of Science and Religion, 1965ff
• Theology and Science, 2003ff
• Science Christian Belief, 1988ff
• Journal of Islamic Science, 1984ff.
• Research News and Opportunities, 2000ff.

14
9. Encyclopedias Handbooks

• Multiple Textbooks during the 1990s
• Encyclopedia of Science Religion, 2 vols,
• MacMillan 2003 (cf. Articles)
• The Oxford Handbook in Science Religion,
• Oxford University Press 2006.
• Springer Encyclopedia under elaboration

15
10. Website Communication

• Free newsletter by e-mail (ca. 10 per week)
• www.metanexus.org
• Free website with e-resources
• www.counterbalance.org

16
Niels Henrik GregersenThe Complexification of
NatureSupplementing the Neo-Darwinian
ParadigmCTNS Research Conference October 9,
2004 It is not appropriate for human beings to
reckon in, or to hope, that a Newton will some
day appear, who could make understandable even
the emergence of a blade of grass according to
laws of nature without an ordering
purpose. Immanuel Kant, Critigue of Judgment B
338
17
Overview

• 0. Introduction
• Complexity and Explanatory Pluralism
• The Case for Biological Trends in Evolution
• The Explanandum
• Selection and Self-Organization
• Explanatory Models in Current Biology
• Theological Explanations and Redescriptions
• a. A Theology of Neo-Darwinism
• b. A Theology of Convergent Evolution
• c. A Theology of Self-Organization

18
Neo-Darwinian Difficulties with Complexity

• Daniel C. Dennett, Darwins Dangerous Idea, 1995
  
• Global, long-term progress, amounting to the
  view that things in the biosphere are, in
  general, getting better and better and better,
  was denied by Darwin, and although it is often
  imagined by onlookers to be an implication of
  evolution, it is simply a mistake a mistake no
  orthodox Darwinians fall for

19
Darwins Own Progressivism

•  Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, 1859
• And as natural selection works solely by and for
  the good of each being, all corporeal and mental
  endowments will tend to progress toward
  perfection.

20

• Parameters of Biological Complexity
• Diversification
• Adaptive Exploration of Ecospace
• Size (Copes Law)
• Morphological Complexification
• Functional Complexification

21

• Homes Rolston III, Genes, Genesis, and
  God, 1999
• Increases in capacities for centralized
  control (neural networks with control centers,
  brains surpassing mere genetic and enzymatic
  control), increases in capacities for sentience
  (ears, eyes, noses, antennnae), increases in
  capacities for locomotion (muscles, fins, legs,
  wings), increases in capacities for manipulation
  (arms, hands, opposable thumbs), increases in
  capacities for acquired learning (feedback loops,
  synapses, memory banks), increases in capacities
  for communication and language acquisition all
  these take increased complexity

22
Neo-Darwinism Defined

• August Weismann, The Omnipotence of Natural
  Selection A Rebuttal of Herbert Spencer, 1893
• Weismanns barrier between genetic and somatic
  cells
• Hard inheritance against Lamarckianism
• Accepted the term Ultra-Darwinism
• Not exaggeration, but the full implementation of
  the principle of natural selection has been
  reached

23
St. J. Goulds Explanation

• Stephen Jay Gould, The Structure of Evolutionary
  Theory, 2002, 904
• Copes Law receives a reversed interpretation as
  the structurally constrained and passive
  evolution (of an abstracted central tendency, I
  might add) from small size, rather than as active
  evolution towards larger size based of the
  organismic advantages of greater bodily bulk
  under natural selection.

24
Simon Conway Morris Convergent Evolution

•  
• Put simply, contingency is inevitable, but
  unremarkable. It need not provoke discussion,
  because it matters not. There are not an
  unlimited ways of doing something. For all its
  exuberance, the forms of life are restricted and
  channeled.
• Simon Conway Morris, The Crucible of Creation,
  1998, 13

25
Simon Conway Morris Convergent Evolution

• A Reconstruction
• Physical Constraint Theory
• Chemical Ancestor Theory
• Morphological Convergence Theory
• Adaptational Convergence Theory
• The richness of creation does not prove the
  existence of God, but all is congruent, Lifes
  Solution, 2003.

26
Four Options for Relating Selection and
Self-Organization

• Self-Organization and Natural Selection are not
  closely related
• Self-Organization and Natural Selection are
  Aspects of a single unified Process (Stuart
  Kauffmann)
• Natural Selection Constrains Self-Organization,
  which Drives Evolution (D.R. Brooks E.O. Wiley)
• Self-Organization Constrains Natural Selection,
  which Drives Evolution
• (J. Maynard Smith o.a.)

27
Theological Rationality in Sci-Rel

• Neither Natural Theology
• (no unmediated appeal
  to Nature)
• Nor Revealed Theology
• (no unmediated appeal
  to God)
• Coherence between well-developed theories of
  the sciences and well-developed theological
  views
• The task of theology is to develop the
  richest possible theological theory, which at the
  same time is able to clarify its connections with
  the current sciences. Accordingly, the
  theologians work will be both challenged and
  facilitated by the data, theories, and thought
  models emerging from the sciences.

28
A Theology of Convergent Evolution

• 1st Step Explaining the Biotic Principle
• The potentiality for life in the physical
  and chemical set-up of the universe is open for a
  theistic interpretation as a divine preparation
  of chemistry for the realm of the living.
• The tighter the life-favoring conditions are on
  the one hand, and the richer the expressions of
  life is on the other, the more convincing is the
  theological explanation.

29
A Theology of Neo-Darwinism

• 2nd theological Step Re-Describing Selection
• No guaranteed Progress
• Fragility of Life
• Local purposes at the center
• Global purpose in God (eschatological)
• Theologia praeter, sed non contra scientiam

30
A Theology of Neo-Darwinism II

• 3rd theological Step Re-Describing Random
  Mutations
• Lady Luck (Gould) has no regal status
  Chance refers to unspeciable causes
• Arthur Peacocke Chance means randomness, not
  absurdity
• Chance has over-all beneficial functions
• For a theist, God must now be seen as acting to
  create in the world through what we call chance
  operating within the created order, each stage of
  which constitutes the launching pad for the
  next.

31
A Theology of Neo-Darwinism III

• 3rd step Re-Describing Random Mutation
• Robert John Russell God determines (within the
  statistical laws) the otherwise undetermined
  quantum events with far-reaching effects on
  mutations and macro-evolution
• God fulfills what nature offers specifically in
  all events, moment by moment.
• Theological principle
• Nature God
  Nature.

32
A Theology of Self-Organization

• 4th theological step Re-describing
  Self-Organization
• Overcoming the constrastive thought-pattern
• The power of love means empowering
• The Fallacy in the divine self-limitation
  argument is that it presupposes a conflict
  between divine power and creature power The
  fallacy presupposes a fixed pie of power.
  According to the fixed pie image, if God gets a
  big slice then creation gets a proportionally
  smaller slice
• Peters and Hewlett, Evolution from Creation
• Kenosis means the self-realization of love, not
  self-withdrawal

33
A Theology of Self-Organization

• Self-Organization suggest a Principle of Grace
• God is more than a remote designer at the edge of
  universe God is the blessing God that divests
  the divine love to be realized in the midst of
  creation
• Instructional information is emerging from within
  the physical and chemical reality (bottom-up).
  Likewise, God works from within creation
  (bottom-up) rather than introducing information
  supernaturally.
• Only when higher-order structures have developed
  from below, we have top-down causation by way
  of selective information processing.

34
Concluding perspective

• Finitum capax infiniti
• The transcendence of God is displayed in the
  openness for further development in creation.
• The Ubiquity of God does not mean that character
  of divine is manifest everywhere (cf. the
  theodicy-problem)