|
1
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
6
|
- The mission of CTNS:
- promote the creative mutual interaction between theology and the natural
sciences.
|
|
7
|
- Research
- Teaching
- Public Service
|
|
8
|
- 10-year collaboration with the Vatican Observatory yielding six volumes
on “scientific perspectives on
divine action”.
- The Annual J.K Russell Fellowship: for 20 years distinguished scholars
have lectured at CTNS.
- New refereed journal: Theology and Science
|
|
9
|
- Doctoral and seminary courses at the Graduate Theological Union,
Berkeley
- Science and Religion Course Program ( 1998-2002) 4-year program that
sponsored courses internationally through teaching grants, workshops,
conferences, and educational resources
|
|
10
|
- International membership
- Public Forums
- Worldwide web Resources at
www.ctns.org
- CTNS Bulletin (past issues available online at www.ctns.org)
- Theology and Science
- Programs at the AAAS and AAR
|
|
11
|
- Science & the Spiritual Quest
(1996-2003)
- A seven-year international program: outstanding scientists describe the
connections between scientific research and religious experience.
- STARS builds on and extends beyond SSQ from public service to research:
it is the “New Quest”
|
|
12
|
|
|
13
|
- The goal of STARS is to sponsor research by small teams of scientists
and humanities scholars on the ways science, in light of philosophical
and theological reflection, points towards the nature, character and
meaning of ultimate reality.
|
|
14
|
- Priority will be given to young scientists with outstanding potential
who are relatively new to interdisciplinary research.
- We anticipate that STARS research will have a major impact on both the
academic and public sectors of culture.
|
|
15
|
- Because STARS research is meant to break new ground, our approach to
funding it, while in some ways sharply defined, is in other ways wide
open to and encouraging of innovative new approaches.
|
|
16
|
- We will provide examples of ways that might be fruitful points of
departure in suggesting how to relate science and ultimate reality, but
we strongly expect that radically new ways will arise that none of us
has fully anticipated.
|
|
17
|
- So surprise us with your ingenuity, boldness and vision, share with us
your team's synergism and courage, and convince us that your proposal
should be judged as deserving serious funding in a highly competitive
market!
|
|
18
|
- STARS will award up to $1.3 million in twenty-seven grants to research
teams on a highly competitive basis.
|
|
19
|
- $20,000 Research Planning Grants.
- Up to twenty research planning grants of $20,000 each will be awarded
to assist teams in the formation of their proposal for the $100,000
grants and/or to provide modest support for research.
- $100,000 Research Grants.
- Up to five research grants of $100,000 each will be awarded.
- $200,000 Research Grant Renewals.
- Up to two research grant renewals of $200,000
- will be awarded.
|
|
20
|
- $20,000 Research Planning Grants.
- Applications due May 1, 2007.
- $100,000 Research Grants.
- Applications due Nov. 1, 2007.
- $200,000 Research Grant Renewals.
- Applications due Nov. 1, 2008.
|
|
21
|
- What qualifies as fundable STARS research is narrowly defined in two
important ways:
- it must be highly interdisciplinary, spanning both qualifying fields in
the natural sciences and qualifying fields in the humanities, and
- that interdisciplinarity must be embodied in a Research Team.
|
|
22
|
- Interdisciplinarity means that:
- STARS research cannot be limited to either a single field or to
multiple fields, whether they are within the sciences or the
humanities.
- Instead STARS research must be drawn from qualifying fields in both the
sciences and the humanities.
|
|
23
|
- Team Research means that:
- STARS Research is not the result of individual research or of research
accomplished through conferences.
- Instead STARS research must be undertaken by small teams of
researchers.
|
|
24
|
- Finally, the product / expected outcome must reflect this
interdisciplinary team-structured research.
- It must be an integrated, multiple-authored text / research result /
lecture series / research seminar, etc..
- It must stem from the synthetic and synergistic work of the team as a
whole.
|
|
25
|
- A STARS Research Team consists of at least 2 and not more than 6
members.
- One or more scientists
- One or more humanities scholars
- Each in the following qualifying fields:
|
|
26
|
- Qualifying scientific fields include:
- physics;
- astronomy;
- cosmology;
- molecular and evolutionary biology;
- computer science;
- cognitive and neuroscience;
- psychology;
- mathematics.
|
|
27
|
- Qualifying humanities fields include:
- philosophy;
- philosophy of science;
- philosophy of religion;
- history of science;
- history of religion;
- phenomenology of religion;
- religious studies;
- theology.
|
|
28
|
- Each Research Team member must have a Ph.D. or equivalent, or be an
exceptionally well qualified ABD ("all but dissertation")
graduate student.
- Each Research Team member must have a record of outstanding publications
in refereed professional journals.
|
|
29
|
|
|
30
|
- Single field
- Multiple fields in science
- Multiple fields in humanities
- Multiple fields in science and humanities
|
|
31
|
- Single field
- Multiple fields in science
- Multiple fields in humanities
- Multiple fields in science and humanities
|
|
32
|
- STARS offers a unique vision of the way its particular form of
interdisciplinary research is to be undertaken. This vision further narrows the kind
of research that STARS will fund:
- STARS research must move
- from science
- to transcendence and
ultimate reality.
|
|
33
|
- In STARS, the primary fields are the natural sciences. These are the
central research areas for philosophical and theological analysis.
- The humanities scholars provide a philosophical and/or theological
analysis of the theories and discoveries of the sciences in order to
point to and reflect on the nature, character and meaning of ultimate
reality.
|
|
34
|
- This means that philosophy and theology enter into the research
primarily by way of facilitating the movement from the sciences to that
which ultimately transcends the sciences even while being the ground and
deepest reality of the empirical world the sciences study.
|
|
35
|
- In this sense, STARS research is not “interdisciplinary” in the usual
way the term is used.
- The terms “ transcendence” and “ultimate reality” do not denote a field
of research or academic discipline.
- Instead they denote a type of question being asked and a reference to
that which most generally embodies it.
|
|
36
|
- STARS funded research should exhibit lavish creativity and elegant
innovation.
- It should celebrate the exhilarating discovery of new knowledge about
the ways ultimate reality
- both grounds and transcends the extraordinary universe in which we live
- and provides the wealth of spiritual, mystical, aesthetic, ethical and
religious dimensions of our experience of this universe and its
ultimate ground and goal.
|
|
37
|
- STARS also broadens the possibilities for innovative research by
qualified Research Teams:
- STARS calls for a variety of new research methods that include but
potentially go far beyond those normally employed in the international,
intercultural and inter-religious dialogue called “science and
religion.”
|
|
38
|
- In science and religion, each field is typically an equal partner in a
common research project consisting of dialogue and mutual interaction.
|
|
39
|
- In science and religion, the discoveries of science are then integrated
into the theologies of a world religion either directly or indirectly
through their philosophical interpretation, leading to a critical
reconstruction of these theologies.
- Conversely the philosophical and theological assumptions underlying and
infusing science are studied by philosophers and theologians from the
perspectives offered by world religions, and these humanities scholars
are free to offer new, critical insights to these assumptions which
could lead to new and fruitful scientific research programs.
|
|
40
|
- In STARS, however, the primary “data” that points towards ultimacy is
drawn from the sciences.
- It is then interpreted through both philosophical and theological
analysis by the Research Team as a whole without an a priori and
normative commitment to the sources and categories found in the world
religions.
|
|
41
|
- In STARS, the term “transcendence" has been intentionally chosen to
allow for a striking diversity in the meaning of ultimacy --- from God
to emptiness and from nature qua nature to the categories presupposed in
philosophical ethics and aesthetics
|
|
42
|
- Still, some of the ongoing research in science and religion might have
qualified for STARS funding:
- Nancey Murphy and George Ellis
- David Bohm and Jiddu Krishnamurti
- Matthieu Ricard and Trinh Xuan Thuan
- Ted Peters and Martinez Hewlett.
|
|
43
|
- STARS research differs even more sharply from the new explorations
called “science and its ‘big questions.’”
|
|
44
|
- Here, regardless of the way this research is packaged and described and
its publications titled, the “big questions” actually stay strictly
within the limits of science.
Without the professional analysis of scholars trained in the
humanities they have no explicit bearing on transcendence and ultimate
reality.
|
|
45
|
- Such "science and its 'big questions'" research does not
qualify for STARS funding.
|
|
46
|
|
|
47
|
- We anticipate that STARS research will focus on one or more focal themes
in science and follow one or more distinctive methods which move from
science to its implications for what is ultimately real, true, good, and
beautiful.
- Here are some key focal themes represented by the January, 2007 STARS
research conferences.
- For details, please visit www.ctnsstars.org/conferences
|
|
48
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
53
|
- Next we explore a variety of distinctive methods for potentially
fundable STARS research.
|
|
54
|
- “All cosmological models are constructed by augmenting the results of
observations by a philosophical principle.”
-
Paul Davies, “Multiverse Cosmological Models,”
|
|
55
|
- A. Time and ultimate reality
- i) Relativity
- ii) Quantum mechanics
- iii) Cosmology
- vi) Thermodynamics, complexity,
- self-organization
|
|
56
|
- Thousands of particles explode from the collision point of two
relativistic gold ions in the “STAR detector” of Relativistic Heavy
Ion Collider.
- B. Causality and ultimate reality
|
|
57
|
- C. Complexity, self-organization and ultimate reality
|
|
58
|
- D. Mind, matter and ultimate reality
|
|
59
|
- A. Natural
- theology
- The fine-tuning of the universe (shown here) can be a design argument
for God.
|
|
60
|
- The possible vales of the strong coupling constant and the
electromagnetic constant. Regions
in pink, blue and yellow are incompatible with the physical
possibilities for the biological evolution of life.
- Our universe is characterized by those precise vales which make
evolution possible. Why is that?
- Answers include: Observer selection (because we’re here), multiverses
(all possibilities are realized in some universe) or God (who knowingly
chose to create just the right kind of universe). How do we chose?
|
|
61
|
- A. Natural
- theology
- The mathematics of infinity and the mind of God
|
|
62
|
- Georg Cantor, 1845-1918, explored the mathematics of infinity by
constructing modern set theory.
Here he is flanked by “aleph naught,” standing for the
transfinite countable infinities, and backed by the Cantor set. Cantor believed that lying beyond all
conceptions of the transfinites is Absolute Infinity which he considered
to be God.
|
|
63
|
- B. General approaches to “theology and science” if reconstructed along
the lines of STARS research
|
|
64
|
- For many Catholics, nature
provides a basis for ethics via natural law theory: what is contrary to
nature is wrong. But does this
violate the “is/ought” distinction and the normative role of revelation?
|
|
65
|
- For many persons, the experience of nature aided by science and
scientific instruments, is in itself a mystical experience.
- “Even as a single cell responds to its environment … it is by being in
the environment of God that we gain some small insight into the mind of
God.” --- Pauline M. Rudd,
SSQ biologist
|
|
66
|
- “General relativity is too beautiful not to be true.” -- Albert Einstein
|
|
67
|
- Illustration: R. Palais and L. Benard A computer-generated rendering of
five abstract mathematical surfaces. This image was awarded first place
in the illustration category of the National Science Foundation/Science
2006 Visualization Challenge.
|
|
68
|
|
|
69
|
- Steady-state cosmology (1948):
- Fred Hoyle, Thomas Gold, Hermann Bondi
- Antipathy to theistic implications of t=0
- Required an alternative to General Relativity
- Anticipated some features of today’s inflationary cosmology
- Fred Hoyle, Geoffrey Burbidge, and Jayant V. Narlikar, A Different
Approach to Cosmology (Cambridge University Press, 2000)
|
|
70
|
- Development of quantum mechanics ~1900-1930
- Not: competing interpretations (e.g., Heisenberg indeterminism, Bohm
determinism)
- Instead: competing influences in its formulation
- Einstein: Spinoza
- Bohr: Kierkegaard / yin-yang
- Planck: Calvin
- Schrődinger: Vedanta
|
|
71
|
- Today: Altered formulations of quantum mechanics
- Search for a fully-objective formulation of QM
- Overcome the measurement problem by modifying the Schrödinger equation:
- i. nonlinear terms
- ii. stochastic terms
- Abner Shimony, Search for a Naturalistic World View (Cambridge
University Press, 1993)
|
|
72
|
- For a ‘worked example’ see my PowerPoint lecture for Conference 2:
- Life in the Universe:
- ‘Back to the drawing boards’ or
- “the Cosmic Christ”?
- Online on the STARS Conference
2 webpage; summary follows…
|
|
73
|
- Summary: Science interpreted philosophically and then interpreted
theologically.
- For example, is life rare or abundant in the universe?
- Does the answer determine whether life is meaningful or meaningless?
- Will intelligent life have moral capacity?
- Will it be challenged by moral failure?
- Will it be redeemed by God?
- Methodology: “Theology of nature”: Ian Barbour
|
|
74
|
- How do we make it into a potentially fundable STARS Research Program?
- Let’s try the most challenging of the seven methods:
-
New directions in scientific research based on the underlying
philosophical and theological issues in SETI research keeping within
methodological naturalism
|
|
75
|
- 1) ET exists in relative
abundance
- Ontological assumption: uniformity of physics and biology (Drake:
Occam)
- 2) ET can be recognized by us by
its signal
- Rationality assumption: more common than diverse
- 3) ET wants to be discovered
- Rational / ethical assumption: contact / relationship is more valuable
than isolation
- 4) ET more likely benign than
malevolent
- Rational / ethical assumption: love is stronger than hate
|
|
76
|
- Philosophical assumption:
- 1) ET exists in relative
abundance
- Ontological assumption: uniformity of physics and biology (Drake:
Occam)
- Theological assumption:
- God created the universe with the right laws of nature so that life
capable of conscious relationship could evolve and come into
relationship with God
- Philosophical assumption:
- 2) ET can be recognized by us
by its signal
- Rationality assumption: more common than diverse
- Theological assumption:
- Rationality in creatures reflects the rationality of God (divine logos)
through which all things were created
|
|
77
|
- Philosophical assumption:
- 3) ET wants to be discovered
- Rational / ethical assumption: contact / relationship is more
valuable than isolation
- Theological assumption:
- God the Creator is a triune community of relationships and God’s
creatures reflect that intrinsic yearning for relationship
- Philosophical assumption:
- 4) ET more likely benign than
malevolent
- Rational / ethical assumption: love is stronger than hate
- Theological assumption:
- God is love and love grounds the universe, overcoming hate
|
|
78
|
- Christian theology Sagan’s
theology
- God Nature
- Creation ex nihilo Creation out of chaos
- (e.g. eternal inflation)
- Humanity: imago dei Humanity: rationality
- Humanity: sinful Humanity: tripartite brain,
- evolutionary fluke
- Salvation: Christ Salvation: science
- Eschatology: heaven, Eschatology: ET,
- new creation galactic civilizations
|
|
79
|
- Seek to provide additional philosophical and theological grounds to
extend SETI research.
- Murphy & Ellis: Moral Nature of the Universe
- ET will be both a rational and a moral agent: expand the search for
evidence:
- evidence of rationality: signals from ET
- evidence of morality: ?
|
|
80
|
- à From “SETI” to “SETIMA”:
- “Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligent Moral Agents”
|
|
81
|
|
|
82
|
- A set of philosophical and theological assumptions can be seen as
underlying current SETI research
- To the extent that the STARS-enhanced SETI project becomes comparatively
more successful than the existing SETI project is, its success offers
indirect evidence for the philosophical and theological assumptions
which warranted it.
- In short, STARS Research may lead to new directions or research in
science and, in addition, new insights into key issues in philosophy and
theology.
|
|
83
|
- And, of course, any combination of these methods together with new ones
exploring these and other focal questions…
- “The game’s afoot!”
|
|
84
|
- STARS is supported through a generous grant to CTNS from the John
Templeton Foundation. The mission of the Templeton Foundation is to
serve as a philanthropic catalyst for discovery in areas engaging life’s
biggest questions. These questions range from explorations into the laws
of nature and the universe to questions on the nature of love,
gratitude, forgiveness, and creativity.
|
|
85
|
- Photo of Mother Teresa:
- http://cyberindian.com/india/mother.htm
- The Carl Sagan Portal:
- http://www.carlsagan.com/
- Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider:
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particle_physics
- Visualization Challenge:
- http://www.sciencemag.org/content/vol313/issue5794/cover.dtl
|
|
86
|
- Generalized Julia Set:
- http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/fractals/fracday2.gif
- Human brain section
- http://brainmuseum.org/specimens/primates/human/sections/human2061_6.jpg
- Cantor’s photo backed by the Cantor set
- http://www.mathematicianspictures.com/Mathematicians/Cantor.htm
- “Close Encounters of the Third Kind”
- http://www.imdb.com/gallery/mptv/1362/Mptv/1362/6001_0004.jpg.html?path=gallery&path_key=0075860
|
Notes