December 26, 2007
The New Wars of Religion: Believers Write Back
John Habgood in the TLS:
Hans Küng, the eminent Roman Catholic theologian, has written what he describes as “a short book on the meaning of the universe”, and much of what he writes echoes the views just described, albeit from a somewhat different perspective. He also draws an interesting parallel between cosmology and Gödel’s famous incompleteness theorem. The latter is a mathematical proof that no system of axioms can prove itself as being free from contradiction. Nor, says Küng, can a theory of the universe. The point was originally made by Stephen Hawking, who admitted that he had given up his quest for a “grand unified theory of everything” on the grounds that we are part of it. Any explanation which tries to include the observer doing the explaining must necessarily be incomplete. Add to this Popper’s dictum about the tentativeness of all scientific statements as being falsifiable but not ultimately provable, and the limitations of our knowledge become all too apparent. Both scientists and theologians, in other words, and even popes, need to accept their fallibility.
Apart from a passing reference, this is a Richard Dawkins-free book. It also provides a useful reminder that there was a scientifically and theologically based tradition of atheism in European culture long before Darwin. Küng comments, “Beyond question, the critique of religion offered by these ‘new materialists’ has not remotely reached the depth of their classical predecessors”. Feuerbach, Marx, Freud and Nietzsche, where are you now?
“Science”, Küng continues, “does not have to ‘prove’ the existence or superfluity of God. Rather, it has to advance the explicability of our universe by physics as far as possible and at the same time leave room for what in principle cannot be explained by physics.”
I am not sure this is a wise way of putting things, being all too redolent of the “God of the gaps”. Nevertheless, like all of Küng’s work, this is a learned book, full of interesting insights, drawing heavily on European philosophy and theology, and frequently critical of his own Church.
Posted by Robin Varghese at 03:16 PM | Permalink





Comments
Note for the New Year:
No more pro-or anti-relgion posts, please, please, plese. You want to believe, go to it; you do not? ok. We see things not as they are but as we are. A book by a beliver or one by a non-believer is not going to change any views on the subject. I swear to god.
Posted by: fred lapides | Dec 26, 2007 4:33:18 PM
Are the statements by the theologians meant to stop science from looking ever deeper into the initial conditions on the birth of the universe. Look, the cosmological inflationary theory looks to fit extremely well to what has been observed in extremely accurate surveys e.g. WMAP, and inflationary cosmology will be a part of the "theory of everything". I would bet that Hawking is back online in regard a "theory of everything" if he did publicly doubted it at some point. I think that the concept of the "theory of everything" is totally misunderstood by laymen, theologians and the public at large. It does not mean that we have a theory which can predict designs or absolute outcomes which gives humanity godlike powers. No, none of that. It is probablistic only and it tells us how the history of natural law which dictates all of Science has come about. It finishes the understanding of Science and is apart from nonfalsifiable meta-physics or religion. Progress is being made but media reporting has been poor at relating this.
Posted by: Mark A. Thomas | Dec 26, 2007 5:00:21 PM
Any human understanding based on investigation proceeds from the point-on-a-line the self is. Science is the wonderful and necessary compilation of those investigations; even when it extrapolates it begins at the edge of the self and proceeds outward, claiming what it catalogs, owning the knowledge of what it finds.
Religion is an attempt at conversation with what's already out there, the existant unknown, beyond the self - or it should be.
What's happened to religion and to science as practiced today is they've both been infested by the worst kinds of human beings, whose arrogance and opportunism are destructively self-centered, and whose actions and effects run counter to every noble principle and moral precept either science or religion has given us.
Posted by: Roy Belmont | Dec 26, 2007 7:25:25 PM
Epic new fantasy series or just a typo in the title?
Posted by: senderista | Dec 26, 2007 8:25:16 PM
Sadly just a typo.
Posted by: Robin | Dec 26, 2007 9:21:02 PM
Darn! I wanted a new fantasy of a improved psychopathic space daddy. The old gods are so Bronze Age Fiction in nature, and out of date.
Maybe we could find a roll model in the Ronald Reagan Home for the Criminally Insane?
Posted by: Dave Ranning | Dec 27, 2007 3:08:25 AM
People can post pro- or anti-religion posts galore in 2008, as far as I'm concerned, but my No. 1 New Year's resolution will be to read no more pronouncements by archbishops, or former archbishops, on the "new atheism." Where did these guys get their education, anyway?
Posted by: JonJ | Dec 27, 2007 6:11:47 PM
The so called "believers" are just trying to revive the mommy-daddy "creator" god of conventional exoteric religion--- the parental deity---the "god" that is entirely other. See:
http://www.aboutadidam.org/readings/parental_deity/index.html
Most, if not all, atheists are only, and quite rightly, refusing to subscribe to this mommy-daddy deity.
Posted by: John | Dec 27, 2007 9:03:12 PM
The more I read these things from theologians, the more I come to the conclusion that their writings have more in common with thought-experiments and mind games, as opposed to the observable universe.
Talking about the observer, and Godel, etc., is all interesting and such, but what these theologians totally lack is something that is empirical. Something concrete, real, tangeable. They keep pushing their beliefs so far away from the real world that they just end up confirming what most atheists are saying: all this fancy theologian stuff is just complicated babble.
Posted by: chris | Dec 27, 2007 9:03:32 PM
Pastafarians---
May the noode be with you.
True believers who talk like pirates:
TAMPA TRIBUNE – [At the Polk County School Board] five of its seven members declared a personal belief in the concept of intelligent design, the religiously based explanation of the development of life believed in by many Christians.
Four of those five sympathetic board members said they would like to see intelligent design taught in Polk schools as an alternative to Darwinian evolution, at a time when new state standards mentioning evolution by name for the first time are under consideration. . .
Yet a few weeks later, the controversy is dying with a whimper. There's no board support for a challenge to the proposed standards. Some of the five school board members blame the local newspaper for trying to start a fight. . .
What happened? You can start with the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. The satirical religious Web site asserts that an omnipotent, airborne clump of spaghetti intelligently designed all life with the deft touch of its "noodly appendage." Adherents call themselves Pastafarians. They deluged Polk school board members with e-mail demanding equal time for Flying Spaghetti Monsterism's version of intelligent design.
"They've made us the laughingstock of the world," said Margaret Lofton, a school board member who supports intelligent design. She dismissed the e-mail as ridiculous and insulting.
Posted by: dave Ranning | Dec 27, 2007 9:10:26 PM
Post a comment