[FRIAM] Proofs of God?

Fri Oct 13 15:24:52 EDT 2017

I humorously sugest that beer, silly shows, and perhaps poodles are proof.

I then step out of this talk before someone coments that was indeed rather
silly. And perhaps sugests that only certain beers are.

On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 12:44 PM, George Duncan <gtduncan at gmail.com> wrote:

> By
> Jeremy England
> Oct. 12, 2017 6:29 p.m. ET
> 311 COMMENTS
> <https://www.wsj.com/articles/dan-brown-cant-cite-me-to-disprove-god-1507847369#comments_sector>
>
> I recently learned that I play a role in Dan Brown’s new novel, “Origin.”
> Mr. Brown writes that Jeremy England, an MIT physics professor, “was
> currently the toast of Boston academia, having caused a global stir” with
> his work on biophysics. The description is flattering, but Mr. Brown errs
> when he gets to the meaning of my research. One of his characters explains
> that my literary doppelgänger may have “identified the underlying physical
> principle driving the origin and evolution of life.” If the fictional
> Jeremy England’s theory is right, the suggestion goes, it would be an
> earth-shattering disproof of every other story of creation. All religions
> might even become obsolete.
>
> It would be easy to criticize my fictional self’s theories based on Mr.
> Brown’s brief description, but it would also be unfair. My actual research
> <http://www.englandlab.com/publications.html> on how lifelike behaviors
> emerge in inanimate matter is widely available, whereas the Dan Brown
> character’s work is only vaguely described. There’s no real science in the
> book to argue over.
>
> My true concern is with my double’s attitude in the book. He is a prop for
> a billionaire futurist whose mission is to demonstrate that science has
> made God irrelevant. In that role, Jeremy England says he is just “trying
> to describe the way things ‘are’ in the universe” and that he “will leave
> the spiritual implications to the clerics and philosophers.”
>
> Two years ago I wrote in Commentary magazine that it is impossible simply
> to describe “the way things are” without first making the significant
> choice of what language to speak in. The language of physics can be
> extremely useful in talking about the world, but it can never address
> everything that needs to be said about human life. Equations can elegantly
> explain how an airplane stays in the air, but they cannot convey the awe
> someone feels when flying above the clouds. I’m disappointed in my
> fictional self for being so blithely uninterested in what lies beyond the
> narrow confines of his technical field.
>
> I’m a scientist, but I also study and live by the Hebrew Bible. To me, the
> idea that physics could prove that the God of Abraham is not the creator
> and ruler of the world reflects a serious misunderstanding—of both the
> scientific method and the function of the biblical text.
>
> Science is an approach to common experience. It addresses what is
> objectively measurable by inventing models that summarize the world’s
> partial predictability. In contrast, the biblical God tells Moses at the
> burning bush: “I will be what I will be.” He is addressing the uncertainty
> the future brings for all. No prediction can ever fully answer the question
> of what will happen next.
>
> Humans will always face a choice about how to react to the unknowable
> future. Encounters between God and the Hebrew prophets are often described
> in terms of covenants, partly to emphasize that seeing the hand of God at
> work starts with a conscious decision to view the world a certain way.
>
> Consider someone who assumes that all existence is the work of a creator
> who speaks through the events of the world. He can follow that assumption
> down the road and decide whether God seems to be keeping his side of the
> bargain. Many of us live like this and feel that with time our trust in him
> has been affirmed. There’s no scientific argument for this way of drawing
> meaning from experience. But there’s no way science could disprove it
> either, because it is outside the scope of scientific inquiry.
>
> Some religious adherents do make claims that deserve to be disputed by
> science. For instance, they may openly acknowledge that their deepest
> beliefs are incompatible with the existence of dinosaurs. The fictional
> me—and perhaps Mr. Brown too—might hope to put these holdouts back on their
> heels. But disputes like this never answer the most important question: Do
> we need to keep learning about God? For my part, in light of everything I
> know, I am certain that we do.
>
> *Mr. England is a professor of physics at the Massachusetts Institute of
> Technology.*
>
> Appeared in the October 13, 2017, print edition.
>
> George Duncan
> Emeritus Professor of Statistics, Carnegie Mellon University
> georgeduncanart.com
> See posts on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram
> Land: (505) 983-6895
> Mobile: (505) 469-4671
>
> My art theme: Dynamic exposition of the tension between matrix order and
> luminous chaos.
>
> "Attempt what is not certain. Certainty may or may not come later. It may
> then be a valuable delusion."
> From "Notes to myself on beginning a painting" by Richard Diebenkorn.
>
> "It's that knife-edge of uncertainty where we come alive to our truest
> power." Joanna Macy.
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 12:36 PM, Stephen Guerin <
> redfishgroupllc at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Do you have a non paywall copy?
>>
>> On Oct 13, 2017 12:32 PM, "George Duncan" <gtduncan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Following up on a FRIAM discussion this morning at St John's College:
>>> Truth comes in various guises. Jeremy England recognizes this.
>>>
>>> https://www.wsj.com/articles/dan-brown-cant-cite-me-to-dispr
>>> ove-god-1507847369
>>>
>>> George Duncan
>>> Emeritus Professor of Statistics, Carnegie Mellon University
>>> georgeduncanart.com
>>> See posts on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram
>>> Land: (505) 983-6895
>>> Mobile: (505) 469-4671
>>>
>>> My art theme: Dynamic exposition of the tension between matrix order and
>>> luminous chaos.
>>>
>>> "Attempt what is not certain. Certainty may or may not come later. It
>>> may then be a valuable delusion."
>>> From "Notes to myself on beginning a painting" by Richard Diebenkorn.
>>>
>>> "It's that knife-edge of uncertainty where we come alive to our truest
>>> power." Joanna Macy.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ============================================================
>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
>>> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>>>
>>
>> ============================================================
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
>> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>>
>
>
> ============================================================
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20171013/689d3efc/attachment.html>