Showing papers in "Zygon in 1988"
[...]
TL;DR: DeNicola as discussed by the authors pointed out that very recently moral philosophy has taken a turn toward a more traditional, particularistic approach, which could mitigate the problems I described, and because creationism is essentially antiscientific, my more philosophical concerns miss the mark.
Abstract: . Comments on my essay, “A Tale of Two Controversies,” were made by Daniel R. DeNicola, Thomas F. Green, Mary Hesse, Holmes Rolston 111, and Abner Shimony. This reply focuses first on three issues: that very recently moral philosophy has taken a turn toward a more traditional, particularistic approach, which could mitigate the problems I described; second, that because creationism is essentially antiscientific, my more philosophical concerns miss the mark; third, that the relativism of the “new philosophy of science” ought not be uncritically accepted. Finally, I compare Hesse's position with that of Shimony, indicating how the former implies a narrowing of distance between scientific description and moral prescription.
83 citations
TL;DR: For instance, this paper argued that the process and products of evolution are morally unacceptable and act in opposition to the ethical progress of humanity. But, as they argued, what is, in the biological world, normally ought not.
Abstract: . T. H. Huxley's essay and prolegomena of 1894 argued that the process and products of evolution are morally unacceptable and act in opposition to the ethical progress of humanity. Modern sociobiological insights and studies of organisms in natural settings support Huxley and justify an even more extreme condemnation of nature and an antithesis of the naturalistic fallacy: what is, in the biological world, normally ought not. Modern biology also provides suggestions on the origin of the human moral impulse and on tactics likely to be effective in the combat against nature urged by Huxley.
61 citations
TL;DR: In contrast to Christian theology that has ignored science, the authors suggests that a credible doctrine of God as creator must take into account scientific understandings of the world, and the introduction of the principle of inertia into seventeenth-century science and philosophy helped change the traditional idea of the creator (which included divine conservation and governance) into a deist concept of God.
Abstract: . In contrast to Christian theology that has ignored science, this essay suggests that a credible doctrine of God as creator must take into account scientific understandings of the world. The introduction of the principle of inertia into seventeenth-century science and philosophy helped change the traditional idea of God as creator (which included divine conservation and governance) into a deist concept of God. To recapture the idea that God continually creates, it is important to affirm the contingency of the world as a whole and of all events in the world. Reflecting on the interrelationship of contingency and natural law provides a framework for relating scientific theories of a universal field, the concept of emergent evolution, and the theological concept of eternal divine spirit active in all creation.
31 citations
TL;DR: The authors argued that evolution is in some sense consistently good and argued that humans must make an unremitting effort to expand a circle of sympathy for others, but they did not discuss whether evolution is consistently good.
Abstract: . I agree with comments suggesting that humans must make an unremitting effort to expand a circle of sympathy for others. However, I disagree with the idea, expressed by everyone except Sarah Hrdy, that evolution is in some sense consistently good.
29 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors employ the scientific methodology of Imre Lakatos for the reconstruction of theology along scientific lines, in which auxiliary hypotheses of both theological and scientific origin are automatically included.
Abstract: . Critical realism is a problematic philosophical doctrine that unnecessarily complicates attempts to relate theology and science. A more satisfactory approach employs the scientific methodology of Imre Lakatos for the reconstruction of theology along scientific lines. Theological research programs would automatically include auxiliary hypotheses of both theological and scientific origin.
23 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that the justification of cognitive claims in theology can be adequately dealt with if the epistemological issues of metaphorical reference, experiential adequacy, and explanatory progress are seen as crucial problems for the more encompassing problem of rationality in theology.
Abstract: . The justification of cognitive claims in theology can be dealt with adequately only if the epistemological issues of metaphorical reference, experiential adequacy, and explanatory progress are seen as crucial problems for the more encompassing problem of rationality in theology. In order to guarantee any claim to reality depiction the theologian will have to argue for a plausible theory of reference on the basis of interpreted religious experience. In this discussion important analogies between the rationality of theological theorizing and the rationality of science are revealed.
22 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the relation between rationality in science and rationality in moral discourse is discussed. But the relationship between rationality and moral education is not discussed in the context of socio-educational controversies, such as the creation evolution controversy and the moral education controversy.
Abstract: . The relation between rationality in science and rationality in moral discourse is of interest to philosophers and sociologists of science, to educators and moral philosophers. Apparently conflicting conceptions of rationality can be detected at the core of two current socio-educational controversies: the creationievolution controversy and that concerning “moral education.” This paper takes as its starting point the recorded views of participants in these controversies; exhibits the contradictions and their effect on the public; relates these contradictions to developments in the philosophy and history of science; and suggests, in a preliminary way, one approach for dealing with the problem.
15 citations
TL;DR: Using the work of Karl Popper and Imre Lakatos as a guide, the following theological theory is proposed: Homo sapiens is God's created co-creator, whose purpose is the stretching/enabling of the systems of nature so that they can participate in Gods purposes in the mode of freedom.
Abstract: . One of the basic intentions of theology is to extend the explanatory function of the community's faith beyond the community to the realm of wider human experience. In this sense, theology may be called “scientific,’and it will benefit from conforming as much as possible to the characteristics of scientific theory formation. Using the work of Karl Popper and Imre Lakatos as a guide, the following theological theory is proposed: Homo sapiens is God's created co-creator, whose purpose is the stretching/enabling of the systems of nature so that they can participate in Gods purposes in the mode of freedom. It is argued that this research program produces new knowledge in relating the Christian faith to scientific views of human being as comprised of both genes and cultures to a theory of technological civilization; to freedom, determinism, and natural selection; and to credible notions of human purpose. Traditional Christian doctrines are related to this research program.
15 citations
TL;DR: The authors analyzes the relation of creatio ex nihilo and creatio continua in Wolfhart Pannenberg's theology and proposes three categories of contingency: global, local, and nomological.
Abstract: . The concept of contingency serves to bridge the doctrine of creation and natural science in Wolfhart Pannenberg's theology. My paper first analyzes the relation of creatio ex nihilo and creatio continua. Next I suggest three categories of contingency: global, local, and nomological. Under each category I assess Pannenberg's use of physics, cosmology, and philosophy of science. Although I agree with Pannenberg's emphasis on continuous creation and on the role of science in renewing the doctrine of creation, I argue for a shift in the discussion from Pannenberg's topics to others, such as the anthropic principle, quantum physics, and thermodynamics.
9 citations
TL;DR: For example, despite the harsh scientific basis of Social Darwinism, its followers strove to unify nature with humane feelings, and T. Huxley would abandon the attempt, acknowledging in effect that no complete world view was possible as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: . Despite the harsh scientific basis of Social Darwinism, its followers strove to unify nature with humane feelings—for world views necessarily attempt such reconciliations. To answer the difficult “problem of evil” posed by natural selection and survival of the fittest, Social Darwinists such as Charles Darwin, Alfred Russel Wallace, and Herbert Spencer resorted to three kinds of theodicy: sentimental denial of the problem, belief in progress, and belief in perfection. Spencer's writings particulary display at different times both a rigid individualism and a softer organicism. Eventually, however, T. H. Huxley would abandon the attempt, acknowledging in effect that no complete world view was possible.
6 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors discuss two general issues that presently obstruct communication between scientists and theologians in this arena and that are brought into acute focus by Wolfhart Pannenberg, the need to exercise care in the use of such denotative concepts as field especially in understanding the Darwinian character of the evolutionary process.
Abstract: . Theology and science are both essential to the process of making sense of the world. Yet their relationship over the centuries has been largely adversarial. The Darwinian revolution, in particular, has necessitated a radical reinterpretation of the traditional dogma concerning creation. In this paper I discuss two general issues that presently obstruct communication between scientists and theologians in this arena and that are brought into acute focus by Wolfhart Pannenberg. First, the need to exercise care in the use of such denotative concepts as field especially in understanding the Darwinian character of the evolutionary process is addressed. Second, the ontological room science necessarily leaves theology in this enterprise is considered.
TL;DR: The authors raise pragmatic objections to critical realists' belief that representations have a connection to the world, that of truth or reference for example, which is independent of their usefulness to us, and argue that knowledge about this connection serves to put religion and science in their proper places with respect to one another.
Abstract: . Critical realists would have us believe that representations have a connection to the world, that of truth or reference for example, which is independent of their usefulness to us. They would have us believe further that knowledge about this connection serves to put religion and science in their proper places with respect to one another. This essay raises pragmatic objections to these belief's.
TL;DR: In this paper, it is argued that the intersection of theological and natural science in their epis-temological foundations can enhance their ontological commitment and heuristic thrust, and a similar combination of critical realism and ontological openness is apparent in the profound change that has taken place in the rational structure of rigorous science from the radical dualism and closed causal system of classical mechanics to the unifying world view and open dynamic field-theories of modern physics.
Abstract: . Intrinsic to rigorous knowledge of God is the recognition that positive theological concepts and statements about God arising under the compelling claims of God's reality upon the human mind must have an open revisable structure. A similar combination of critical realism and ontological openness is apparent in the profound change that has taken place in the rational structure of rigorous science from the radical dualism and closed causal system of classical mechanics to the unifying world view and open dynamic field-theories of modern physics. It is argued that the intersection of theological and natural science in their epis-temological foundations can enhance their ontological commitment and heuristic thrust.
[...]
TL;DR: The subject of cosmic evolution is my religion and the process of change itself is my God as discussed by the authors, and global ethics and a planetary culture, which cosmic evolution mandates, are the key to the survival of technologically competent life forms, both here on Earth and perhaps elsewhere in the Universe.
Abstract: . My conclusions are threefold: The subject of cosmic evolution is my religion. The process of change itself (especially developmental change) is my God. And global ethics and a planetary culture, which cosmic evolution mandates, are the key to the survival of technologically competent life forms, both here on Earth and perhaps elsewhere in the Universe.
TL;DR: The authors argue that evolutionary science often carries an implicit or explicit understanding of who and what humans are, one which may not be coherent with human self-understandings in moral education.
Abstract: Both science and ethics are embedded in cultural tradi- tions where truths are shared through education; both need com- petent critics educated within such traditions. Education in both ought to be directed although moral education demands levels of responsible agency that science education does not. Evolutionary science often carries an implicit or explicit understanding of who and what humans are, one which may not be coherent with the implicit or explicit human self-understanding in moral education. The latter in turn may not be coherent with classical human self-understandings. Moral education may enlighten and elevate the human nature that has evolved biologically.
TL;DR: In this paper, Hefner's paper illustrates an adequate application of the theory of critical realism and overcomes the suspicion suggested by Robbins, and van Huyssteen's essay as an application of Critical Realism which tends toward correspondence in spite of his correct statement.
Abstract: . I read Robbins's essay as a hermeneutics of suspicion against the claims of critical realism, especially the tendency of critical realism to achieve correspondence with the world rather than participation in changing it. I read van Huyssteen's essay as an application of critical realism which tends toward correspondence in spite of his correct statement of the theory. I read Hefner's paper as an exposition of both claims and methods capable of conveying truth and genuine knowledge. As such, Hefner's paper illustrates an adequate application of the theory of critical realism and overcomes the suspicion suggested by Robbins.
TL;DR: Human concern with problems of being and becoming promotes conceptions of ideal states of being, exemplified by paragons and heroes and projected as Utopias or visions of salvation; it leads to regimens for cultivating and maintaining individual ability to meet social expectations; and it produces fantasies, as in myth and popular literature, that rehearse the problems and that offer escape from them and roles to emulate in dealing with them.
Abstract: . Human concern with problems of being and becoming promotes conceptions of ideal states of being, exemplified by paragons and heroes and projected as Utopias or visions of salvation; it leads to regimens for cultivating and maintaining individual ability to meet social expectations; and it produces fantasies, as in myth and popular literature, that rehearse the problems and that offer escape from them and roles to emulate in dealing with them. Many of these regimens and fantasies appear in the rituals and teachings of organized religion. Many also figure in private devotions apart from established religions. The many forms they take constitute much of the religious life of ordinary people. From this viewpoint, there is much to examine in American life.
TL;DR: The products of evolution are morally neutral, but the human moral sense is arguably a positive good as discussed by the authors, which does not require ultimate justification in the sense of correspondence with or attack upon reality out there.
Abstract: . I agree with George Williams's most significant point: both questions and answers about our moral natures lie in our biological origins. He fails, however, to show that nature is morally evil and that therefore we should vigilantly resist it. The products of evolution are morally neutral, but the human moral sense is arguably a positive good. Morality is functional. It does not require ultimate justification in the sense of correspondence with or attack upon reality “out there.” It is an adaptation “intended” to make us social, and sociality—with its sense of right and wrong—makes us fitter than otherwise
TL;DR: In this article, Eger's comparison of controversies in science and morals is extended to a consideration of the nature of rationality in each, and the problem for moral philosophy is to delineate its own appropriate types of social criteria of validity.
Abstract: . Martin Eger's comparison of controversies in science and morals is extended to a consideration of the nature of “rationality” in each. Both theoretical science and moral philosophy are held to be relativist in social and historical terms, but science also has definitive non-relativist pragmatic criteria of truth. The problem for moral philosophy is to delineate its own appropriate types of social criteria of validity.
TL;DR: In this paper, Barrow and Tipler's anthropic cosmological principle is reviewed from ancient times to the present, and defend both a weak and a strong version of the anthropic principle.
Abstract: . John D. Barrow and Frank J. Tipler's recently published Anthropic Cosmological Principle is an encyclopedic defense of melioristic evolutionary cosmology. They review the history of the idea from ancient times to the present, and defend both a “weak” version, and two “strong” versions of the anthropic principle. I argue the weak version of the anthropic principle is true and important, but that neither of the two strong versions are well grounded in fact. Their “final” anthropic principle is a revision of Teilhard de Chardin's evolutionary cosmology. They rectify Teilhard's factual errors but commit even more serious psychological and religious errors of their own.
TL;DR: The biologist's finding that a living organism is of transient significance compared with its lines of heritage and their consequences, it is argued, is constructively important for ethical and theological understanding.
Abstract: . I concur with Williams that improving human ethics requires full consideration of the biogenetic facts; but I argue that the understanding of biogenetic facts, and of ethics also, can be improved by a fuller view of nature's mechanism for selecting what is fit, a view recently generated by physical scientists. For me ethics necessarily must fit the evolved genotype, but ethics does not emerge until the rise of cultural evolution, where nature selects a culturetype symbiotic with the genotype. I outline my integrated dynamics of the relation of culturetypes to genotypes and to the laws governing physical systems. The biologist's finding that a living organism is of transient significance compared with its lines of heritage and their consequences, I argue, is constructively important for ethical and theological understanding.
TL;DR: For people in religious groups, identity work may involve the subjective experience of interactions with spirit beings as in altered states of consciousness such as dreams, reverie, or trance.
Abstract: . Because actual social experience is often damaging to conceptions of self, individuals in all societies engage in identity work beyond ordinary social interaction. For people in religious groups, identity work may involve the subjective experience of interactions with spirit beings as in altered states of consciousness such as dreams, reverie, or trance. In memories, anticipations, and fantasies, secular Americans, too, may experience gratifying imaginary social interactions when they gain recognition and acclaim from imagined others. Unlike spirit relations these fantasies are not culturally defined as “real.” However, like spirit relations, they may have very real effects on self-maintenance.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors discuss the epistemological and ethical consequences of Darwin's doctrine from the point of view of contemporary philosophy of biology; they give a brief outline of evolutionary epistemology and evolutionary ethics which both have caused many controversies.
Abstract:
Charles Darwin died in 1882—more than a hundred years ago. His doctrine, however, is still alive. Recently there has been particular interest in his ideas among philosophers. These ideas are indeed a challenge to (traditional) philosophy: To take Darwin seriously means to revise—or even to destroy—some positions in (traditional) philosophy. Among the philosophical disciplines which have been affected by Darwin's ideas are epistemology and moral philosophy (ethics). In the present paper I shall discuss the epistemological and ethical consequences of Darwin's doctrine from the point of view of contemporary philosophy of biology; I shall give a brief outline of evolutionary epistemology and evolutionary ethics which both have caused many controversies.
TL;DR: In this article, the authors question whether anyone can formulate a broadly acceptable moral system that will not in some respects be constrained by the legacy of generations spent as selfish and kin-selected replicators.
Abstract: . Although there is no questioning the heroism of those who “rebel against the selfish replicators” their task seems very nearly insurmountable. I question whether anyone can formulate a broadly acceptable moral system that will not in some respects be constrained by the legacy of generations spent as selfish and kin-selected replicators.
TL;DR: The purpose of the journal is described in this article, and some development projects are proposed to expand the impact, develop the leadership, and establish more firmly the financial base of the company.
Abstract: . This editorial statement describes the purpose of Zygon and the need for such a journal. It then sketches the history of the journal and of its financial affairs. Next it proposes some development projects to expand the impact of the journal around the world, to develop Zygon leadership, and to establish more firmly Zygon's financial base. The statement opens and closes with the news of Zygon's receiving a Gift Subscription Challenge Grant.
TL;DR: The concern for offspring and kin identified by Williams as the principle force of evolution is not inherently evil in its operation in human society as mentioned in this paper, and instead of juxtaposing it as enemy to justice and altruism, we should try to extend the scope of felt kinship to the whole human race.
Abstract: . Contrary to George C. Williams, moral judgments of nature are not appropriate, whereas affirmation of the intrinsic value of creation is. The concern for offspring and kin identified by Williams as the principle force of evolution is not inherently evil in its operation in human society. Instead of juxtaposing it as enemy to justice and altruism, we should try to extend the scope of felt kinship to the whole human race.
TL;DR: In this article, Eger's challenge to the demarcation between the natural sciences and ethics is discussed, and arguments are given both against his endorsement of the new philosophy of science and against his rejection of the fact-value dichotomy.
Abstract: . Criticisms are presented against Eger's challenge to the demarcation between the natural sciences and ethics. Arguments are given both against his endorsement of the “new” philosophy of science and against his rejection of the fact-value dichotomy. However, his educational recommendations are reinforced rather than weakened by these criticisms
TL;DR: The distinction between teaching science as application and teaching it as education is crucial in confronting these problems as mentioned in this paper and the distinction between moral education and the teaching of creationism is crucial to our work.
Abstract: . The educational controversies that Martin Eger discusses regarding moral education and the teaching of “creationism” arise from taking a single aspect of moral education and making it the whole, and from taking a single aspect of scientific work and assuming that it is the whole. The distinction between teaching science as application and teaching it as education is crucial in confronting these problems.
TL;DR: In this paper, Ervin Laszlo emphasizes insight and understanding, the mutability and flexibility of knowledge, cultural diversity and organizational interdependence, and harmony in nature, and asks that as human beings we assume responsibility for creative, reasoned, ethically sound decisions in dealing with the inner and outer limits of humanity.
Abstract: . Fundamental questions arise in every age, questions such as those concerning the individual in society, social order, labor and exchange, meaning and ethics, and spiritual life and values. In addressing these questions Ervin Laszlo emphasizes insight and understanding, the mutability and flexibility of knowledge, cultural diversity and organizational interdependence, and harmony in nature. General Systems Theory and a theory of general evolution provide the framework for his thinking. He asks that as human beings we assume responsibility for creative, reasoned, ethically sound decisions in dealing with the inner and outer limits of humanity.