Karl Giberson and Mariano Artigas
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- January 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780195310726
- eISBN:
- 9780199785179
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195310726.001.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Religion and Society
This book examines the popular writings of the six scientists who have been the most influential in shaping perceptions of science, how it works, and how it relates to other fields of human endeavor, ...
More
This book examines the popular writings of the six scientists who have been the most influential in shaping perceptions of science, how it works, and how it relates to other fields of human endeavor, especially religion. Biologists Stephen Jay Gould, Richard Dawkins, and Edward O. Wilson; and physicists Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking, and Steven Weinberg, form a constellation of scientists who have become public intellectuals, influencing millions of people around the world. All six have made major and highly original contributions to science, and all six have stepped onto the public stage, articulating a much larger vision for science, how it should work, and what role it should play in the worldview of the modern world. In so doing, they have challenged many traditional ideas, such as belief in God. The scientific prestige and literary eloquence of these great thinkers combine to transform them into what can only be called oracles of science. Their controversial, often personal, sometimes idiosyncratic opinions exert an enormous influence on modern intellectual conversation, both inside and outside science. The book carefully distinguishes science from philosophy and religion in the writings of the oracles, and invites readers to a respectful dialogue with some of the greatest minds of our time.Less
This book examines the popular writings of the six scientists who have been the most influential in shaping perceptions of science, how it works, and how it relates to other fields of human endeavor, especially religion. Biologists Stephen Jay Gould, Richard Dawkins, and Edward O. Wilson; and physicists Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking, and Steven Weinberg, form a constellation of scientists who have become public intellectuals, influencing millions of people around the world. All six have made major and highly original contributions to science, and all six have stepped onto the public stage, articulating a much larger vision for science, how it should work, and what role it should play in the worldview of the modern world. In so doing, they have challenged many traditional ideas, such as belief in God. The scientific prestige and literary eloquence of these great thinkers combine to transform them into what can only be called oracles of science. Their controversial, often personal, sometimes idiosyncratic opinions exert an enormous influence on modern intellectual conversation, both inside and outside science. The book carefully distinguishes science from philosophy and religion in the writings of the oracles, and invites readers to a respectful dialogue with some of the greatest minds of our time.
Karl Giberson and Mariano Artigas
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- January 2007
- ISBN:
- 9780195310726
- eISBN:
- 9780199785179
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195310726.003.0007
- Subject:
- Religion, Religion and Society
The oracles of science: Carl Sagan, Stephen Weinberg, Richard Dawkins, Stephen Hawking, Edward O. Wilson, and Stephen Jay Gould make connections between science and culture, and they particularly ...
More
The oracles of science: Carl Sagan, Stephen Weinberg, Richard Dawkins, Stephen Hawking, Edward O. Wilson, and Stephen Jay Gould make connections between science and culture, and they particularly voice their ideas about religion. Like all great scientists, they have done important work in specific areas, but unlike most scientists, they have a grand view of reality and have elected to engage the deeper cultural and worldview issues of our time. The oracles of science, for the most part, create the impression that science is hostile to religion. Their writings produce the impression that science supersedes religion, and even explains it away. As history has shown, science is all too frequently enlisted in the service of propaganda and we must be on guard against intellectual nonsense masquerading as science.Less
The oracles of science: Carl Sagan, Stephen Weinberg, Richard Dawkins, Stephen Hawking, Edward O. Wilson, and Stephen Jay Gould make connections between science and culture, and they particularly voice their ideas about religion. Like all great scientists, they have done important work in specific areas, but unlike most scientists, they have a grand view of reality and have elected to engage the deeper cultural and worldview issues of our time. The oracles of science, for the most part, create the impression that science is hostile to religion. Their writings produce the impression that science supersedes religion, and even explains it away. As history has shown, science is all too frequently enlisted in the service of propaganda and we must be on guard against intellectual nonsense masquerading as science.
Ananda Rose
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- September 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199890934
- eISBN:
- 9780199949793
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199890934.003.0010
- Subject:
- Religion, Religion and Society
This brief final chapter entertains the question: What might Jesus do about migrant deaths, illegal immigration, and the U.S.–Mexico border. The question is particularly important since many of the ...
More
This brief final chapter entertains the question: What might Jesus do about migrant deaths, illegal immigration, and the U.S.–Mexico border. The question is particularly important since many of the groups and individuals highlighted throughout the book, on all ideological sides, identify with being Christian, although not all agree on how Jesus might answer the question.Less
This brief final chapter entertains the question: What might Jesus do about migrant deaths, illegal immigration, and the U.S.–Mexico border. The question is particularly important since many of the groups and individuals highlighted throughout the book, on all ideological sides, identify with being Christian, although not all agree on how Jesus might answer the question.
William P. Brown
- Published in print:
- 2010
- Published Online:
- May 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199730797
- eISBN:
- 9780199777075
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199730797.003.0010
- Subject:
- Religion, Biblical Studies, Theology
This concluding chapter builds on the discussion of the previous material by briefly reviewing the distinctive features of each creation tradition and their connections with science, as well as ...
More
This concluding chapter builds on the discussion of the previous material by briefly reviewing the distinctive features of each creation tradition and their connections with science, as well as explicating the hermeneutical dynamics involved in bringing scientific understanding and the biblical views of creation into constructive dialogue. A major section is devoted to discerning the intertextual connections that bind the various creation traditions together literarily and canonically. Central also is a discussion of the interrelated profiles of human identity featured in the traditions, followed by reflections on human responsibility in the face of mounting environmental degradation, including global warming. It is argued that the biblical view of creation is a more effective consciousness-raiser than Richard Dawkins’s commendation of evolutionary theory. Nevertheless, a scientifically and biblically informed faith is most effectual in fulfilling humanity’s commission to “serve and preserve” creation (Genesis 2:15).Less
This concluding chapter builds on the discussion of the previous material by briefly reviewing the distinctive features of each creation tradition and their connections with science, as well as explicating the hermeneutical dynamics involved in bringing scientific understanding and the biblical views of creation into constructive dialogue. A major section is devoted to discerning the intertextual connections that bind the various creation traditions together literarily and canonically. Central also is a discussion of the interrelated profiles of human identity featured in the traditions, followed by reflections on human responsibility in the face of mounting environmental degradation, including global warming. It is argued that the biblical view of creation is a more effective consciousness-raiser than Richard Dawkins’s commendation of evolutionary theory. Nevertheless, a scientifically and biblically informed faith is most effectual in fulfilling humanity’s commission to “serve and preserve” creation (Genesis 2:15).
Daniel C Dennett
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- May 2008
- ISBN:
- 9780195189636
- eISBN:
- 9780199868605
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195189636.003.0012
- Subject:
- Psychology, Social Psychology
Whether free will is real or illusory is such an important topic that many thinkers overreact to it, jumping to invalid conclusions in their desire to fend off what they see as either mystical or ...
More
Whether free will is real or illusory is such an important topic that many thinkers overreact to it, jumping to invalid conclusions in their desire to fend off what they see as either mystical or nihilistic visions. This chapter examines three instances of this overshooting in recent work by Daniel Wegner, Richard Dawkins, and Sue Blackmore. It reaches the conclusion that free will, in the only sense worth wanting, is real but not quite what most people think it is. In spite of what many people uncritically suppose, indeterminism is not required for genuine free will.Less
Whether free will is real or illusory is such an important topic that many thinkers overreact to it, jumping to invalid conclusions in their desire to fend off what they see as either mystical or nihilistic visions. This chapter examines three instances of this overshooting in recent work by Daniel Wegner, Richard Dawkins, and Sue Blackmore. It reaches the conclusion that free will, in the only sense worth wanting, is real but not quite what most people think it is. In spite of what many people uncritically suppose, indeterminism is not required for genuine free will.
Terryl L. Givens
- Published in print:
- 2009
- Published Online:
- February 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780195313901
- eISBN:
- 9780199871933
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195313901.003.0013
- Subject:
- Religion, Religion and Society
Preexistence has survived through poetry, philosophy, and theology. In the contemporary world, the cultural work done by preexistence is now done by surrogates, scientific or quasi-scientific ...
More
Preexistence has survived through poetry, philosophy, and theology. In the contemporary world, the cultural work done by preexistence is now done by surrogates, scientific or quasi-scientific paradigms that address the same dilemmas, yearnings, and questions. Examples include John Rawls, Charles Darwin, Carl Jung, Rupert Sheldrake, Richard Dawkins, and Noam Chomsky.Less
Preexistence has survived through poetry, philosophy, and theology. In the contemporary world, the cultural work done by preexistence is now done by surrogates, scientific or quasi-scientific paradigms that address the same dilemmas, yearnings, and questions. Examples include John Rawls, Charles Darwin, Carl Jung, Rupert Sheldrake, Richard Dawkins, and Noam Chomsky.
Matteo Mameli
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- January 2008
- ISBN:
- 9780195332834
- eISBN:
- 9780199868117
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195332834.003.0003
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Philosophy of Mind
The term inheritance is often used to talk about biological traits. It can be argued that in this context this term is used to express two different concepts. The first refers to the processes ...
More
The term inheritance is often used to talk about biological traits. It can be argued that in this context this term is used to express two different concepts. The first refers to the processes responsible for the reliable reoccurrence of biological features within lineages. The second refers to the processes responsible for the reliable reoccurrence of phenotypic differences between lineages. These two concepts are referred to as the concept of F-inheritance and the concept of D-inheritance, respectively. The F stands for ‘features that reoccur within lineages’, and the D stands for ‘differences that reoccur between lineages’. The current orthodoxy is that, apart from those few human traits that are under the direct influence of cultural processes, genetic transmission is the only process responsible both for the reliable reoccurrence of traits within lineages and for the reliable reoccurrence of differences between lineages. That is, leaving cultural processes aside, both F-inheritance and D-inheritance coincide with genetic transmission. This chapter argues that the received views of F-inheritance and D-inheritance are wrong. It examines and rejects some of the claims that Richard Dawkins makes in The Extended Phenotype. It is argued that Dawkins's attempt to hold on to a genecentric view of D-inheritance is unsuccessful. His discussion is used to show exactly how the view defended here differs from various versions of the accepted orthodoxy.Less
The term inheritance is often used to talk about biological traits. It can be argued that in this context this term is used to express two different concepts. The first refers to the processes responsible for the reliable reoccurrence of biological features within lineages. The second refers to the processes responsible for the reliable reoccurrence of phenotypic differences between lineages. These two concepts are referred to as the concept of F-inheritance and the concept of D-inheritance, respectively. The F stands for ‘features that reoccur within lineages’, and the D stands for ‘differences that reoccur between lineages’. The current orthodoxy is that, apart from those few human traits that are under the direct influence of cultural processes, genetic transmission is the only process responsible both for the reliable reoccurrence of traits within lineages and for the reliable reoccurrence of differences between lineages. That is, leaving cultural processes aside, both F-inheritance and D-inheritance coincide with genetic transmission. This chapter argues that the received views of F-inheritance and D-inheritance are wrong. It examines and rejects some of the claims that Richard Dawkins makes in The Extended Phenotype. It is argued that Dawkins's attempt to hold on to a genecentric view of D-inheritance is unsuccessful. His discussion is used to show exactly how the view defended here differs from various versions of the accepted orthodoxy.
Walter Moberly
- Published in print:
- 2009
- Published Online:
- February 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780195383355
- eISBN:
- 9780199870561
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195383355.003.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Biblical Studies, History of Christianity
In the light of the enormous weight attached to the early chapters of Genesis in the history of biblical interpretation and in debates between science and religion over matters of origins, it is ...
More
In the light of the enormous weight attached to the early chapters of Genesis in the history of biblical interpretation and in debates between science and religion over matters of origins, it is important to ask some basic questions as to the kind of material with which we are dealing. Through consideration of a number of significant examples, this chapter looks for pointers to the genre of the early chapters of Genesis. There is discussion of some of the numerous internal indicators of genre, whose general significance was noticed long before Darwin. Finally, some suggestions are made as to the difference these indicators should, and should not, make to reading Genesis today.Less
In the light of the enormous weight attached to the early chapters of Genesis in the history of biblical interpretation and in debates between science and religion over matters of origins, it is important to ask some basic questions as to the kind of material with which we are dealing. Through consideration of a number of significant examples, this chapter looks for pointers to the genre of the early chapters of Genesis. There is discussion of some of the numerous internal indicators of genre, whose general significance was noticed long before Darwin. Finally, some suggestions are made as to the difference these indicators should, and should not, make to reading Genesis today.
Michael Ruse
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- February 2006
- ISBN:
- 9780195175325
- eISBN:
- 9780199784707
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/0195175328.003.0011
- Subject:
- Religion, Religion and Society
This essay considers the arguments of three scholars who have maintained that there is indeed a contradiction between Darwinism and religion. The first is entomologist and sociobiologist Edward O. ...
More
This essay considers the arguments of three scholars who have maintained that there is indeed a contradiction between Darwinism and religion. The first is entomologist and sociobiologist Edward O. Wilson, whom Ruse argues is quite sympathetic to religion as an ethical system, but maintains that its existence can be explained on evolutionary grounds; yet, Wilson considers religion to be a necessary illusion, hardly true in its own right. In the case of Richard Dawkins, Ruse considers the thesis — popular among early Christian Darwinians — that God designed life through the process of evolution. One problem with this thesis is the very random, seemingly undersigned nature of evolution, yet Dawkins himself was not worried by random variation. As his third example, Ruse considers his own argument — that the biblical injunction to love one’s neighbor as oneself does not seem to be based on biological fitness as much as would a near-neighbor form of love; yet, Ruse counters himself by arguing that perhaps Jesus’ injunction did not admonish one to love everyone equally, or alternatively. Christianity could be reaching out to extend a system of morality that biology has attuned to only near-neighbor forms of concern. Ultimately, Ruse argues that the conflict between Darwinism and religion was initiated for social and political, not scientific reasons, and that though challenges still exist in reconciling the two viewpoints, there is no necessary contradiction.Less
This essay considers the arguments of three scholars who have maintained that there is indeed a contradiction between Darwinism and religion. The first is entomologist and sociobiologist Edward O. Wilson, whom Ruse argues is quite sympathetic to religion as an ethical system, but maintains that its existence can be explained on evolutionary grounds; yet, Wilson considers religion to be a necessary illusion, hardly true in its own right. In the case of Richard Dawkins, Ruse considers the thesis — popular among early Christian Darwinians — that God designed life through the process of evolution. One problem with this thesis is the very random, seemingly undersigned nature of evolution, yet Dawkins himself was not worried by random variation. As his third example, Ruse considers his own argument — that the biblical injunction to love one’s neighbor as oneself does not seem to be based on biological fitness as much as would a near-neighbor form of love; yet, Ruse counters himself by arguing that perhaps Jesus’ injunction did not admonish one to love everyone equally, or alternatively. Christianity could be reaching out to extend a system of morality that biology has attuned to only near-neighbor forms of concern. Ultimately, Ruse argues that the conflict between Darwinism and religion was initiated for social and political, not scientific reasons, and that though challenges still exist in reconciling the two viewpoints, there is no necessary contradiction.
Edward J. Larson
- Published in print:
- 2003
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780195154719
- eISBN:
- 9780199849505
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195154719.003.0008
- Subject:
- History, American History: 20th Century
This chapter explores the ongoing efforts of evolutionists to consolidate their gains through state education standards. The 1987 US Supreme Court decision in Aguillard stalled the movement to inject ...
More
This chapter explores the ongoing efforts of evolutionists to consolidate their gains through state education standards. The 1987 US Supreme Court decision in Aguillard stalled the movement to inject creation science into the public education but it did not still the underlying controversy over teaching evolution. After 1990, University of California law professor Philip Johnson and his allies advanced the concept of “intelligent design” as scientific theory with a secular purpose suitable for inclusion in public education. Throughout the 1990s, the bedrock for anti-evolutionism in the US remains the biblical literalism of the Protestant fundamentalist church. Richard Dawkins, Dan Dennett, and Will Provine pushed the Darwinist assault on theism in popular books and public lectures.Less
This chapter explores the ongoing efforts of evolutionists to consolidate their gains through state education standards. The 1987 US Supreme Court decision in Aguillard stalled the movement to inject creation science into the public education but it did not still the underlying controversy over teaching evolution. After 1990, University of California law professor Philip Johnson and his allies advanced the concept of “intelligent design” as scientific theory with a secular purpose suitable for inclusion in public education. Throughout the 1990s, the bedrock for anti-evolutionism in the US remains the biblical literalism of the Protestant fundamentalist church. Richard Dawkins, Dan Dennett, and Will Provine pushed the Darwinist assault on theism in popular books and public lectures.
Johannes Quack
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- January 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199812608
- eISBN:
- 9780199919406
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199812608.003.0018
- Subject:
- Religion, Hinduism
The epilogue raises three questions which help to contextualize the description and analysis of ANiS within a broader context: Raised first is the empirical question as to what degree the Indian ...
More
The epilogue raises three questions which help to contextualize the description and analysis of ANiS within a broader context: Raised first is the empirical question as to what degree the Indian rationalist movement can be seen to be part of a global rationalist movement which spread from the 19th century onwards and which also includes, for example, “New Atheists” such as Richard Dawkins. Secondly, on the basis of various materialistic and instrumentalist perspectives on death, the theoretical question is raised as to what degree the concepts of disenchantment and rationalisation help to situate the aims and activities, as well as the specific mode of unbelief of the Indian rationalists, within a larger trans-cultural and trans-historical perspective. Third comes the meta-theoretical, reflexive question of the role of the narratives of disenchantment and rationalisation and the debates around “rationality” within the Cultural Sciences, as well as in Indian intellectual life and cultural politics, and what consequences these might have for attempts to research rationalism in a wider perspective.Less
The epilogue raises three questions which help to contextualize the description and analysis of ANiS within a broader context: Raised first is the empirical question as to what degree the Indian rationalist movement can be seen to be part of a global rationalist movement which spread from the 19th century onwards and which also includes, for example, “New Atheists” such as Richard Dawkins. Secondly, on the basis of various materialistic and instrumentalist perspectives on death, the theoretical question is raised as to what degree the concepts of disenchantment and rationalisation help to situate the aims and activities, as well as the specific mode of unbelief of the Indian rationalists, within a larger trans-cultural and trans-historical perspective. Third comes the meta-theoretical, reflexive question of the role of the narratives of disenchantment and rationalisation and the debates around “rationality” within the Cultural Sciences, as well as in Indian intellectual life and cultural politics, and what consequences these might have for attempts to research rationalism in a wider perspective.
SCOTT ATRAN
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780195178036
- eISBN:
- 9780199850112
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195178036.003.0009
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Philosophy of Religion
Memes are hypothetical cultural units, an idea or practice, passed on by imitation. Although nonbiological, they undergo Darwinian selection like genes. Cultures and religions are supposedly ...
More
Memes are hypothetical cultural units, an idea or practice, passed on by imitation. Although nonbiological, they undergo Darwinian selection like genes. Cultures and religions are supposedly coalitions of memes seeking to maximize their own fitness, regardless of fitness costs for their human hosts. The concept of the meme, introduced by Richard Dawkins in 1976, is now defined as an element of culture that may be considered to be passed on by non-genetic means, especially imitation. Candidate memes include a word, a sentence, a thought, a belief, a melody, a scientific theory, an equation, a philosophical puzzle or a religious ritual. Like genes, memes can pass supposedly “vertically” from parent to child, for example, in the religious practice of circumcision. Memes can also copy themselves “horizontally” from person to person—between peers or from leaders to followers—as with the concept of the meme itself.Less
Memes are hypothetical cultural units, an idea or practice, passed on by imitation. Although nonbiological, they undergo Darwinian selection like genes. Cultures and religions are supposedly coalitions of memes seeking to maximize their own fitness, regardless of fitness costs for their human hosts. The concept of the meme, introduced by Richard Dawkins in 1976, is now defined as an element of culture that may be considered to be passed on by non-genetic means, especially imitation. Candidate memes include a word, a sentence, a thought, a belief, a melody, a scientific theory, an equation, a philosophical puzzle or a religious ritual. Like genes, memes can pass supposedly “vertically” from parent to child, for example, in the religious practice of circumcision. Memes can also copy themselves “horizontally” from person to person—between peers or from leaders to followers—as with the concept of the meme itself.
John Dupré
- Published in print:
- 2005
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199284214
- eISBN:
- 9780191700286
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199284214.003.0004
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Philosophy of Science
This chapter argues that Charles Darwin's theory of evolution is a naturalistic world-view that helped erode religious belief against the claims of science. Philosophical issues are avoided in order ...
More
This chapter argues that Charles Darwin's theory of evolution is a naturalistic world-view that helped erode religious belief against the claims of science. Philosophical issues are avoided in order to give way to naturalistic views on how evolution came into place, as there are issues on things that can be argued to exist such as ghosts, soul, and deities. The compatibility of Darwinism and Christianity is published in a book by biologist Stephen Jay Gould and philosopher Michael Ruse and the correlation is explained in this chapter. If there was a being capable of creating life then his intervention could indeed be the best explanation because it is hard to explain the origin of life in terms of chemical processes.Less
This chapter argues that Charles Darwin's theory of evolution is a naturalistic world-view that helped erode religious belief against the claims of science. Philosophical issues are avoided in order to give way to naturalistic views on how evolution came into place, as there are issues on things that can be argued to exist such as ghosts, soul, and deities. The compatibility of Darwinism and Christianity is published in a book by biologist Stephen Jay Gould and philosopher Michael Ruse and the correlation is explained in this chapter. If there was a being capable of creating life then his intervention could indeed be the best explanation because it is hard to explain the origin of life in terms of chemical processes.
Jeffrey Burton Russell
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780195334586
- eISBN:
- 9780199851423
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195334586.003.0007
- Subject:
- Religion, History of Christianity
The decline of heaven in the twentieth century was revealed by surveys that indicated the growth of atheism and indifference on the one hand, and the fragmentation of religion on the other. ...
More
The decline of heaven in the twentieth century was revealed by surveys that indicated the growth of atheism and indifference on the one hand, and the fragmentation of religion on the other. Individualism and technology came to dominate American values rather than tradition and community. Success meant getting ahead, which implies leaving others behind. Among Christians, many more believed in the immortal soul than in bodily resurrection, and the number affirming beliefs about heaven that are biblically and traditionally based was quite low. No matter how many people or what proportion of people continued to believe in heaven by the end of the century, it became virtually irrelevant in law, the arts, corporations, philosophy, politics, journalism, and society in general. There was no place for heaven in either of the two dominant worldviews at the end of the century: physicalism and deconstruction.Less
The decline of heaven in the twentieth century was revealed by surveys that indicated the growth of atheism and indifference on the one hand, and the fragmentation of religion on the other. Individualism and technology came to dominate American values rather than tradition and community. Success meant getting ahead, which implies leaving others behind. Among Christians, many more believed in the immortal soul than in bodily resurrection, and the number affirming beliefs about heaven that are biblically and traditionally based was quite low. No matter how many people or what proportion of people continued to believe in heaven by the end of the century, it became virtually irrelevant in law, the arts, corporations, philosophy, politics, journalism, and society in general. There was no place for heaven in either of the two dominant worldviews at the end of the century: physicalism and deconstruction.
David Fergusson
- Published in print:
- 2009
- Published Online:
- October 2011
- ISBN:
- 9780199569380
- eISBN:
- 9780191702051
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199569380.003.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Theology
The term ‘new atheism’ is used to describe writings that directly attack the intellectual claims and moral effects of religion. Associated primarily with Richard Dawkins, it also characterises the ...
More
The term ‘new atheism’ is used to describe writings that directly attack the intellectual claims and moral effects of religion. Associated primarily with Richard Dawkins, it also characterises the work of other intellectuals who share much of his hostility towards religion. This chapter offers some reasons why new atheism is worth studying. First, it is the obligation of theologians to respond to the arguments, criticisms, and dismissal of some of their central claims. Second, the discussion suggests that the work of the new atheists is intensely interesting; the range of questions and subjects raised are of special concern. In what follows in the book, a conversation is established between those occupying the middle ground of scepticism and faith, where each side recognises that it has something to learn from the other.Less
The term ‘new atheism’ is used to describe writings that directly attack the intellectual claims and moral effects of religion. Associated primarily with Richard Dawkins, it also characterises the work of other intellectuals who share much of his hostility towards religion. This chapter offers some reasons why new atheism is worth studying. First, it is the obligation of theologians to respond to the arguments, criticisms, and dismissal of some of their central claims. Second, the discussion suggests that the work of the new atheists is intensely interesting; the range of questions and subjects raised are of special concern. In what follows in the book, a conversation is established between those occupying the middle ground of scepticism and faith, where each side recognises that it has something to learn from the other.
Elaine Howard Ecklund and Christopher P. Scheitle
- Published in print:
- 2018
- Published Online:
- September 2017
- ISBN:
- 9780190650629
- eISBN:
- 9780190650650
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/oso/9780190650629.001.0001
- Subject:
- Religion, Religion and Society
Religion vs. Science: What Religious People Really Think busts today’s common myths about science and religion. It reveals several interesting and perhaps surprising realities. The book shows that ...
More
Religion vs. Science: What Religious People Really Think busts today’s common myths about science and religion. It reveals several interesting and perhaps surprising realities. The book shows that religious people love much of science. They perceive conflicts only with the forms of science that seem to have implications for God’s role in the world and the value and sacredness of humans. Yet, they are often suspicious of scientists, thinking that scientists generally do not like religious people. Many religious people claim to be young-earth creationists, but they are actually much more open to evolution than this initial label might suggest. Not all religious people deny that the climate is changing, and that it is changing because of humans. And political views more than religious views are really the best predictor of what Americans think about climate change. Further, religious people want to support the environment, as long as love for the environment does not replace love of people. Finally, religious people are supportive of technological advancements, including typically controversial ideas like reproductive genetic technologies and human embryonic stem-cell research, but they want scientists to reflect more on the moral implications of their work. The book ends with practical suggestions and ideas for collaboration among all individuals and communities.Less
Religion vs. Science: What Religious People Really Think busts today’s common myths about science and religion. It reveals several interesting and perhaps surprising realities. The book shows that religious people love much of science. They perceive conflicts only with the forms of science that seem to have implications for God’s role in the world and the value and sacredness of humans. Yet, they are often suspicious of scientists, thinking that scientists generally do not like religious people. Many religious people claim to be young-earth creationists, but they are actually much more open to evolution than this initial label might suggest. Not all religious people deny that the climate is changing, and that it is changing because of humans. And political views more than religious views are really the best predictor of what Americans think about climate change. Further, religious people want to support the environment, as long as love for the environment does not replace love of people. Finally, religious people are supportive of technological advancements, including typically controversial ideas like reproductive genetic technologies and human embryonic stem-cell research, but they want scientists to reflect more on the moral implications of their work. The book ends with practical suggestions and ideas for collaboration among all individuals and communities.
Henry Plotkin
- Published in print:
- 2007
- Published Online:
- April 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780198568285
- eISBN:
- 9780191584961
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198568285.003.0003
- Subject:
- Psychology, Developmental Psychology, Cognitive Models and Architectures
Conway Lloyd Morgan in Britain and James Mark Baldwin in the USA, near contemporaries of one another, shared several other characteristics. Each had a philosophical sophistication unusual amongst the ...
More
Conway Lloyd Morgan in Britain and James Mark Baldwin in the USA, near contemporaries of one another, shared several other characteristics. Each had a philosophical sophistication unusual amongst the evolutionists and most psychologists of their day. Each was a pioneer, if in different ways. Morgan was one of the first experimental comparative psychologists; Baldwin made seminal contributions in developmental psychology, being the first to understand that human cognitive development proceeds through a series of stages, each of which is qualitatively different from those preceding it. Both wrote a form of memetics, the notion that ideas are the cultural analogues of genes that evolve by way of selection, some 70 and more years before Dawkins' The Selfish Gene. Both also anticipated major ways of advancing thinking as to how evolution and learning may be linked to one another. It is the latter, of course, which is the primary concern of this chapter.Less
Conway Lloyd Morgan in Britain and James Mark Baldwin in the USA, near contemporaries of one another, shared several other characteristics. Each had a philosophical sophistication unusual amongst the evolutionists and most psychologists of their day. Each was a pioneer, if in different ways. Morgan was one of the first experimental comparative psychologists; Baldwin made seminal contributions in developmental psychology, being the first to understand that human cognitive development proceeds through a series of stages, each of which is qualitatively different from those preceding it. Both wrote a form of memetics, the notion that ideas are the cultural analogues of genes that evolve by way of selection, some 70 and more years before Dawkins' The Selfish Gene. Both also anticipated major ways of advancing thinking as to how evolution and learning may be linked to one another. It is the latter, of course, which is the primary concern of this chapter.
Alvin Plantinga
- Published in print:
- 2011
- Published Online:
- January 2012
- ISBN:
- 9780199812097
- eISBN:
- 9780199928590
- Item type:
- book
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199812097.001.0001
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Philosophy of Religion
This book is a long-awaited major statement by a pre-eminent analytic philosopher, on one of our biggest debates—the compatibility of science and religion. The last twenty years has seen a cottage ...
More
This book is a long-awaited major statement by a pre-eminent analytic philosopher, on one of our biggest debates—the compatibility of science and religion. The last twenty years has seen a cottage industry of books on this divide, but with little consensus emerging. This book's author, as a top philosopher but also a proponent of the rationality of religious belief, has a unique contribution to make. The theme of this short book is that the conflict between science and theistic religion is actually superficial, and that at a deeper level they are in concord. The book examines where this conflict is supposed to exist—evolution, evolutionary psychology, analysis of scripture, scientific study of religion—as well as claims by Dan Dennett, Richard Dawkins, and Philip Kitcher that evolution and theistic belief cannot co-exist. The book makes a case that their arguments are not only inconclusive but that the supposed conflicts themselves are superficial, due to the methodological naturalism used by science. On the other hand, science can actually offer support to theistic doctrines, and the text uses the notion of biological and cosmological “fine-tuning” in support of this idea. The book argues that we might think about arguments in science and religion in a new way—as different forms of discourse that try to persuade people to look at questions from a perspective such that they can see that something is true. In this way, there is a deep and massive consonance between theism and the scientific enterprise.Less
This book is a long-awaited major statement by a pre-eminent analytic philosopher, on one of our biggest debates—the compatibility of science and religion. The last twenty years has seen a cottage industry of books on this divide, but with little consensus emerging. This book's author, as a top philosopher but also a proponent of the rationality of religious belief, has a unique contribution to make. The theme of this short book is that the conflict between science and theistic religion is actually superficial, and that at a deeper level they are in concord. The book examines where this conflict is supposed to exist—evolution, evolutionary psychology, analysis of scripture, scientific study of religion—as well as claims by Dan Dennett, Richard Dawkins, and Philip Kitcher that evolution and theistic belief cannot co-exist. The book makes a case that their arguments are not only inconclusive but that the supposed conflicts themselves are superficial, due to the methodological naturalism used by science. On the other hand, science can actually offer support to theistic doctrines, and the text uses the notion of biological and cosmological “fine-tuning” in support of this idea. The book argues that we might think about arguments in science and religion in a new way—as different forms of discourse that try to persuade people to look at questions from a perspective such that they can see that something is true. In this way, there is a deep and massive consonance between theism and the scientific enterprise.
Angus Ritchie
- Published in print:
- 2012
- Published Online:
- January 2013
- ISBN:
- 9780199652518
- eISBN:
- 9780191745850
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199652518.003.0003
- Subject:
- Philosophy, Moral Philosophy, Philosophy of Religion
This chapter makes a prima facie case for thinking all secular moral theories which are ‘sufficiently’ objectivist will also generate an ‘explanatory gap’. The chapter begins with a discussion of ...
More
This chapter makes a prima facie case for thinking all secular moral theories which are ‘sufficiently’ objectivist will also generate an ‘explanatory gap’. The chapter begins with a discussion of natural selection and its role in explaining human cognitive capacities. It argues that evolutionary theory may well be able to account for human acquisition of that accurate beliefs about key features of physical reality and the principles of theoretical reasoning — even if these are taken take to exist independently of the sentiments, beliefs or social conventions of the perceiver. It goes on to claim that in the case of evaluative beliefs that the survival value and the accuracy of beliefs seem to come apart, creating the ‘explanatory gap’.Less
This chapter makes a prima facie case for thinking all secular moral theories which are ‘sufficiently’ objectivist will also generate an ‘explanatory gap’. The chapter begins with a discussion of natural selection and its role in explaining human cognitive capacities. It argues that evolutionary theory may well be able to account for human acquisition of that accurate beliefs about key features of physical reality and the principles of theoretical reasoning — even if these are taken take to exist independently of the sentiments, beliefs or social conventions of the perceiver. It goes on to claim that in the case of evaluative beliefs that the survival value and the accuracy of beliefs seem to come apart, creating the ‘explanatory gap’.
Duncan Kennedy
- Published in print:
- 2008
- Published Online:
- January 2010
- ISBN:
- 9780199237944
- eISBN:
- 9780191706455
- Item type:
- chapter
- Publisher:
- Oxford University Press
- DOI:
- 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199237944.003.0010
- Subject:
- Classical Studies, Ancient Religions
Feminism's engagement with science has been played out on a number of stages. Historians and sociologists have studied the lives of women scientists and have traced the processes by which the ...
More
Feminism's engagement with science has been played out on a number of stages. Historians and sociologists have studied the lives of women scientists and have traced the processes by which the institutions in which science is practised have either excluded women or narrowly restricted the roles they are permitted to play. Another focus has been the role of gender in what might be called the culture of science. The practice of science is often mediated in images that are tendentiously gendered, for example, the image of science as ‘conquest’, a trope that has often taken on connotations of fierce sexual aggression directed at a personified Nature gendered as female. This chapter introduces Lucretius and ancient theories of atomism to explore the role of reductionism within feminist accounts of science. It examines the spectre of ancient myth in science's gendered formulations of the natural world.Less
Feminism's engagement with science has been played out on a number of stages. Historians and sociologists have studied the lives of women scientists and have traced the processes by which the institutions in which science is practised have either excluded women or narrowly restricted the roles they are permitted to play. Another focus has been the role of gender in what might be called the culture of science. The practice of science is often mediated in images that are tendentiously gendered, for example, the image of science as ‘conquest’, a trope that has often taken on connotations of fierce sexual aggression directed at a personified Nature gendered as female. This chapter introduces Lucretius and ancient theories of atomism to explore the role of reductionism within feminist accounts of science. It examines the spectre of ancient myth in science's gendered formulations of the natural world.
