Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

HON-3230 Chance, Emergence or Design

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "HON-3230 Chance, Emergence or Design"— Presentation transcript:

1 HON-3230 Chance, Emergence or Design
Philosophy of Science HON-3230 Chance, Emergence or Design Steven Gollmer Cedarville University

2 Science & Christianity
Creationism Inerrant Bible & effective science Independence Mutual humility in the relationship between science and Christian theology Qualified Agreement Modern science and the return to the “God Hypothesis Partnership Science and Christian theology as partners in theorizing Steven Gollmer Cedarville University

3 Cedarville University
Alternate Terms Key Ideas Problems Creationism Young Earth Creation, Old Earth Creation, 7 literal day Grammatical historical interpretation Need to pay attention to professional scientists Independence Separate Magisteria, NOMA Three-legged stool: Scripture, tradition, reason Who wins when the two meet? Qualified Agreement Intelligent Design, Progressive Creation Evidences for but not proof of God God of the Gaps, Problem of evil Partnership Theistic Evolution, fully gifted creation Robust formational economy How does this differ from a naturalistic model? Steven Gollmer Cedarville University

4 Cedarville University
Paul on Mar’s Hill “May we know what this new doctrine is of which you speak? For you are bringing some strange things to our ears. Therefore, we want to know what these things mean.” Acts 17:19b-20 The picture is that of Paul on Mar’s Hill painted by Raphael. Acts 17: When Paul was in Athens during his 2nd missionary journey, he was waiting for the rest of his team to meet him there. During that time he went to the synagogue and the marketplace and reasoned with them about Jesus and the resurrection. In the synagogue he met with the Jews and in the marketplace he met with Greeks and foreigners. Some Epicurean and Stoic philosophers encountered Paul and wanted to here more of what he was saying. Some said that Paul was speaking nonsense (a babbler). Some said that Paul was starting a new religion (introducing a foreign god). He was led to the Areopagus (Mar’s Hill) and asked to explain “May we know what this new doctrine is of which you speak? For you are bringing some strange thing to our ears. Therefore, we want to know what these things mean.” Steven Gollmer Cedarville University

5 Cedarville University
Epicureans Stoics Material World Two Worlds What is Real? Chance Destiny Why am I here? How should I live? Find My Best Cosmic Laws Epicureans were followers of Epicurus (341 – 270 B.C.) from the island Samos. He was of Athenian descent. The Stoics are named after the Stoa (porch on the public market place) where Zeno (357 – 263 B.C.) of Cyprus taught. To get a feel for these two different philosophies lets answer 4 questions. What is real? For the epicurean the universe consisted of atoms that were eternal in nature. The physical world was all that exists. The universe always was and always will be. They made allowances for the existence of gods, but they resided in the vast emptiness between the stars and had no interaction with the affairs of men. Man has a soul (that which makes them unique), but it was fragile and encased within our bodies. When the body dies, the soul ceases to exist. For the stoics the universe consists of two worlds. The first is the physical or material world. The second is an immaterial world that gives action to the physical world. The physical world came out of the immaterial world and would eventually be destroyed and reborn. This second world was associated with reason, providence or force. The force of the universe was god. It was conscious, thinking, but impersonal. Man has a soul and it gives his body life and action. All objects have a life force. When a person dies, their soul rejoins the cosmic consciousness. Why am I here? For the epicurean things happened by chance. They did not deny a lawful interaction within the physical world, but the affairs of the world are largely the result of chance. There is no purpose in life and when it is done, there is nothing beyond. For the stoic everything happens for a purpose. There is right and wrong and I need to fulfill my role for being here. When life is over, my essence rejoins the cosmic self and has the potential to be reborn again (reincarnated). How should I live? For the epicurean I should make the best of my life. The goal is to maximize pleasure and minimize pain. This was not necessarily a hedonistic pursuit of life, but rather a pursuit of physical enjoyment and freedom from mental anguish. Reason should be used to guide my life and to deal with any questions that may cause guilt feelings. The stoic would pursue a life consistent with the cosmic laws of the universe. In order to do this the stoic would put away any disruptive influence in his life (passions and feeling) which clouds our understanding of the world around us and our ability to live in harmony with it. Accept your fate in the world and don’t let disruptive influence keep you from what is really important. How do I know? The epicurean would site experience as our way of knowing the universe around us. The more we can experience about the world, the better we are at making sense of what is best for us. The stoic would use meditation to remove any distractions around him. At that point he would be able to focus his mind on the present and establish a better connection with the world around him. Examples Epicurean – Modern day atheistic or possibly agnostic scientist. The sum total of reality is the physical universe. In the words of William Provine “There are no gods, no purposes, and no goal-directed forces of any kind. There is no life after death. When I die, I am absolutely certain that I am going to be dead. That’s the end of me. There is no ultimate foundation for ethics, no ultimate meaning in life, and no free will for humans, either. “ Stoic – Modern day Buddhist have similarities. The closer we can be connected to the god within ourselves the more fulfilled we will be. If you were at associate bumper stickers to these groups you will probably see the following. Epicurean – “He who dies with the most toys wins.” “If you don’t like abortion, then don’t get one.” Stoic – “Stuff happens” “May the force be with you.” How do I know? Experience Meditation Steven Gollmer Cedarville University

6 Cedarville University
Worldviews Naturalism Material universe is the sum of all reality Atheism, Humanism, Existentialism Transcendentalism Spiritual nature to all reality Pantheism, Animism, Polytheism Theism Belief in a transcendent God Deism, Finitism, Traditional Theism Steven Gollmer Cedarville University

7 Cedarville University
Philosophical Terms Metaphysics (What exists?) How is the mind related to matter? What is change? Is there reality beyond immediate experience? Ontology (Science of being or reality) Epistemology (How do I know?) What are the sources of knowledge? What is the nature of knowledge? Is our knowledge valid? Ethics (What ought to be?) Steven Gollmer Cedarville University

8 Cedarville University
Arguments for God Cosmological There must be a first mover and there must be some necessary foundation to the things that are continent. Teleological Everything in nature has a purpose and an intelligence must be guiding it. Moral Source for moral values. Ontological Very idea of God implies his existence. Steven Gollmer Cedarville University

9 Theistic Basis of Science
Nature is real. Nature has value. God is not nature. God is rational and nature acts rationally. Laws don’t change and can be modeled. We can understand the creation. We are finite and sinful and need verification. Man can alter nature. (Man has dominion.) Pearcey & Thaxton, The Soul of Science Steven Gollmer Cedarville University

10 Cedarville University
Scientific Realism Nonrational Nonrealism Science does not progress towards more accurate view of the world. Rationality is not an objective notion. (Kuhn) Rational Realism Scientific theories are true Rationality is objective (Popper) Rational Nonrealism (Instrumentalism) Science theory is justified by utility. Science is objectively rational. Phenomenalism Propositions from sensory data is meaningful. (Hume, Russell) Constructive Empiricism Science aim at truth, but different metaphysical characterizations may be empirically equivalent. (van Fraassen) Operationalism Concepts are synonymous with set of operations. (Bridgman) Pragmatism Science gives theories that solve problems. (Laudan) Moreland, Christianity and the Nature of Science, p. 140 Steven Gollmer Cedarville University

11 Cedarville University
Greek Beginnings Democritus Atomism Plato Idealized forms Fixity of species Aristotle Deductive reasoning Steven Gollmer Cedarville University

12 Cedarville University
What is Science? Bacon (Scientific Method) Descartes (Cogito ergo sum, Skepticism) Locke Empiricism-Substantive knowledge from experience Kant Our concepts determine and shape our perceptions. Positivism (Science can lead us to all truth) Popper (Falsification) Kuhn (Paradigms) Methodological Naturalism "Science must be provisionally atheistic or cease to be itself." Steven Gollmer Cedarville University

13 Cedarville University
Greek and Mystic Jews Kabbalism Some things undefinable Some things unobservable Some things unknowable Hidden parts of universe Probabilistic - all things likely, just some are more so As are interpretations, scientific theories are revisable Time of creation, universe has an age Greek All things definable All things deducible All things (potentially) knowable Logic reveals all Deterministic Once logically argued, no revisions are needed (or accepted) All is immutable and uncreated Steven Gollmer Cedarville University

Download ppt "HON-3230 Chance, Emergence or Design"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google