共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 0 毫秒
1.
Stuart Kauffman 《Zygon》2007,42(4):903-914
We have lived under the hegemony of the reductionistic scientific worldview since Galileo, Newton, and Laplace. In this view, the universe is meaningless, as Stephen Weinberg famously said, and organisms and a court of law are “nothing but” particles in morion. This scientific view is inadequate. Physicists are beginning to abandon reductionism in favor of emergence. Emergence, both epistemological and ontological, embraces the emergence of life and of agency. With agency comes meaning, value, and doing, beyond mere happenings. More organisms are conscious. None of this violates any laws of physics, but it cannot be reduced to physics. Emergence is real, and the tiger chasing the gazelle are real parts of the real universe. We live, therefore, in an emergent universe. This emergence often is entirely unpredictable beforehand, from the evolution of novel functionalities in organisms to the evolution of the economy and human history. We are surrounded on all sides by a creativity that cannot even be prestated. Thus we have the first glimmerings of a new scientific worldview, beyond reductionism. In our universe emergence is real, and there is ceaseless, stunning creativity that has given rise to our biosphere, our humanity, and our history. We are partial co-creators of this emergent creativity. It is our choice whether we use the God word. I believe it is wise to do so. God can be our shared name for the true creativity in the natural universe. Such a view invites a new sense of the sacred, as those aspects of the creativity in the universe that we deem worthy of holding sacred. We are not logically forced to this view. Yet a global civilization, hopefully persistently diverse and creative, is emerging. I believe we need a shared view of God, a fully natural God, to orient our lives. We need a shared view of the sacred that is open to slow evolution, because rigidity in our view of the sacred violates how our most precious values evolve and invites ethical hegemony. We need a shared global ethic beyond our materialism. I believe a sense of God as the natural, awesome creativity in the universe can help us construct the sacred and a global ethic to help shape the global civilization toward what we choose with the best of our limited wisdom. 相似文献
2.
Michael D Zeiler 《Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior》2007,88(3):435-443
In The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins reviews the evidence for and against God. After considering arguments for a divine power, he says the main current one is that the characteristics of living creatures must be attributed to an all-powerful designer. Design is the only plausible account, because the excellent fit between each plant and animal and its environment could not possibly have appeared in one stroke by pure chance. Dawkins agrees that randomness could not have done the job, but he says that a designer is equally unlikely. The only viable explanation is evolution by natural selection, a process that operates without plan or design. He then turns to the adaptive value of religious belief. After failing to find any, he proposes that belief in divinities is the by-product of a powerful tendency to learn from others, an adaptive strategy produced by natural selection. Adults and other influential figures teach children many useful things, but they also train them to worship deities. Religious devotion is established through education, and it is maintained over generations by the social learning processes underlying all instances of cultural evolution. Dawkins'' arguments together with other problems encountered in describing evolutionary processes highlight the importance of social learning. His discussion leads the reviewer to assert that only by knowing the mechanisms of social learning is it possible to understand how biological and cultural evolution interact to produce life as we find it. 相似文献
3.
Patricia A. Williams 《Zygon》2001,36(3):563-574
In this essay, I attempt to solve the problem of the existence of evil in a world created by an omniscient, omnibenevolent, omnipotent God. I conclude that evil exists because God wanted to create moral creatures. Because choice is necessary for morality, God created creatures with enormous capacities for choice—and therefore enormous capacities for evil. Material creatures are subject to pain and death because, for such creatures, moral choices are deeply serious. The laws that underlie the material world and from which material life arises are such that, from their workings out on a planet that can support life, natural evils happen. 相似文献
4.
Mark Walker 《Theology & Science》2018,16(3):251-272
This article seeks to provide a unified explanation to two profound challenges to Christian belief: the existence of evil and Darwin’s theory of natural selection. It is argued that an understanding of the full implications of our evolutionary past in conjunction with the Irenaean theodicy provides us with the best answer to these challenges. The traditional Irenaean theodicy emphasizes the importance of education for soul building. Soul building can benefit from technologically enhancing the biological superstructure of our humanity. In particular, genetic engineering can enhance human virtue. The biological basis of our moral natures can be improved using genetic technologies, including (possibly) somatic and germline engineering. To plan for virtue-first enhancement—the Genetic Virtue Project, which focuses on genetic improvements to our moral natures—is of paramount importance for the neo-Irenaean theodicy. 相似文献
5.
John Ostrowick 《South African Journal of Philosophy》2013,32(2):354-368
AbstractRichard Swinburne, in his The Existence of God (2004), presents a cosmological argument in defence of theism (Swinburne 1991: 119, 135). God, Swinburne argues, is more likely to bring about an ordered universe than other states (ibid.: 144, 299). To defend this view, Swinburne presents the following arguments: (1) That this ordered universe is a priori improbable (2004: 49, 150, 1991: 304 et seq.), given the stringent requirements for life (cf. also Leslie 2000: 12), and the Second Law of Thermodynamics (Giancoli 1990: 396); (2) That it seems as if this ordered universe can be explained by theism; (3) A theistic explanation for the universe is more probable because it is a simple explanation. To this end, Swinburne makes use of Bayes’ Theorem. Symbolically, this claim can be represented as (e) for the evidence of the existence of a complex universe, and (h) for a hypothesis. Swinburne’s argument is that theism has a higher prior probability, P(htheism) > P(hmaterialism), since theism is simpler than materialism. He concludes that P(e|htheism) > P(e|hmaterialism). In this paper I will address only this argument (3) above, and defend the view that it is false: theism is not simpler than materialism, nor it is more probably true. I conclude that theism is less probable than materialism, expressed by P(htheism) < P(hmaterialism) : 2/N(2n+1) < 1/n, where N is the number of possible universes and n the number of entities in existence. 相似文献
6.
灵魂是否不灭?上帝是否存在?上帝意志是否具有超必然的自由?这三个问题涉及宗教的根本基础。宗教神学家一直把上述三个问题视为神学的基本问题。一方面把它们奉为神圣的信条,不许信仰者怀疑;另一方面,也不断利用哲学和理性的形式,对之作出各式各样的证明。但是历史上的启蒙哲学家和自然科学家对之发出了公开的挑战,从哲学世界观的高度,从自然科学新成就出发,证明统一的自然界不可能有任何超自然存在。围绕三大神学问题的争论,一直是哲学与神学关系史上的中心问题,它也成了宗教哲学必须解答的重要理论问题。 相似文献
7.
Wolfhart Pannenberg 《Zygon》1988,23(1):3-21
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. 相似文献
8.
Jeffrey Bloechl 《Metaphilosophy》2005,36(5):730-740
Abstract: This essay interprets and responds to Richard Kearney's metaphysics of possibility and hermeneutics of religion against the background of Nietzsche's proclamation of the death of God and the theodicy problem. Kearney's work is thus read as an interesting but ultimately problematic attempt to preserve or perhaps reinstate religious thought after the modern critique of idols. In addition, his positions are compared and contrasted with some of authors with whom he seems to be in limited agreement (for example, Plotinus, Hillesum) as well as some with whom he clearly breaks (for example, Girard, Sölle). 相似文献
9.
Ted Peters 《Zygon》2010,45(4):921-937
The construction of a distinctively Christian “theology of evolution” or “theistic evolution” requires the incorporation of the science of evolutionary biology while building a more comprehensive worldview within which all things are understood in relation to our creating and redeeming God. In the form of theses, this article brings four support pillars to the constructive work: (1) orienting evolutionary history to the God of grace; (2) affirming purpose for nature even if we cannot see purpose in nature; (3) employing the theology of the cross to discern divine compassion in the natural world; and (4) relying on the divine promise of new creation. Among other things, John Haught's blueprint has located the pedestals on which these pillars will stand. For this groundwork, Haught deserves thanks. 相似文献
10.
李大钊易学思想及其早期哲学 总被引:2,自引:0,他引:2
李大钊作为中国激进的民主主义者和中国共产党的创始人之一,其早期对易学有着独特体认和理解,并运用这种体认和理解建立起自己的宇宙观与人生观。他认为周与易体现着体与用、常与变之"宇宙二相",吾人只要"以其不变应其变",就能"以宇宙之生涯为自我之生涯",实现宇宙无尽,即"青春无尽"的人生理想。他用太极、阴阳、变易等易学原理解释、说明进化论,并力图为进化论寻求形上学根据,使之更加合乎中国人的思维习惯;他用进化论来说明易学之阴阳、变易、生生、日新等观念,从而升进了易学的变易观,使大易哲学由传统活转于近代。在他那里,实现了中学与西学、哲学与科学的有机对接。本文认为,在注重易学本身的发展、演化研究的同时,也应注意像李大钊这种对易学援引、运用的研究,进而全面评估易学对中国近代社会进程的影响。 相似文献
11.
The anthropic principle, that the universe exists in some sense for life, has persisted in recent religious and scientific thought because it derives from cosmological fact. It has been unsuccessful in furthering our understanding of the world because its advocates tend to impose final metaphysical solutions onto what is a physical problem. We begin by outlining the weak and strong versions of the anthropic principle and reviewing the discoveries that have led to their formulation. We present the reasons some have given for ignoring the anthropic implications of these discoveries and find these reasons wanting—a real phenomenon demands real investigation. Theological and scientific solutions of the problem are then considered and criticized; these solutions provide dead ends for explanation. Finally, we pursue the path that explanation must follow and look at the physical details of the problem. It seems clear that the anthropic principle has been poorly framed. Removing the ambiguities surrounding the meaning of \"life\" may lead to more profitable investigations. 相似文献
12.
Lantz Fleming Miller 《Metaphilosophy》2019,50(3):377-394
The multimillennial philosophical discussion about life after death has received a recent boost in the prospect of immortality attained via technologies. In this newer version, humans generally are considered mortal but may develop means of making themselves immortal. If “immortal” means not mortal, thus existing for infinity, and if the proposed infinite‐existing entity is material, it must inhabit an infinite material universe. If the proposed entity is not material, there must be means by which it can shed its material substance and exist nonmaterially. The article examines arguments for how an infinite life would be possible given current physical understanding. The paper considers a Pascalian‐style wager weighing the likelihood of adjusting to existence wholly within a finite universe versus betting on there being some way to construe the universe(s) as a viable medium for infinite beings. Conclusion: the case for a finite being to exist infinitely has little viable support. 相似文献
13.
We develop and knit together several theodicies in order to find a more complete picture of why certain forms of (nonhuman) animal suffering might be permitted by a perfect being. We focus on an especially potent form of the problem of evil, which arises from considering why a perfectly good, wise, and powerful God might use evolutionary mechanisms that predictably result in so much animal suffering and loss of life. There are many existing theodicies on the market, and although they offer helpful resources, we combine and further develop several proposals to produce a composite theodicy that avoids certain shortcomings of the individual theodicies. An important element of our project is locating a role for randomness in cosmic and biological evolution. In particular, we show how randomness might enhance or enable certain goods, including everlasting goods, at the risk of temporary evils. 相似文献
14.
《Zygon》1999,34(4):713-728
Books Reviewed: Is God a Virus? Genes, Culture and Religion byJohn Bowker Religion and Science: Historical and Contemporary Issues byIan Barbour The Origins of Virtue by Matt Ridley Nature's Grace: Essays on H. N. Wieman's Finite Theism by Marvin C. Shaw The Divine Constitution by Jeh-Tween Gong 相似文献
15.
Arthur Peacocke 《Zygon》1999,34(4):695-712
The challenge and stimulus to theology that is constituted by the scientific version of Genesis which will prevail for the foreseeable future is expounded in relation to the significance of the succeeding stages of the life process and to the general features of biological evolution. A responsive theology of evolution is discerned as involving a renewal of insights associated with the themes of immanence, panentheism, the Wisdom and Word of God, and a sacramental universe. Such a revitalized theology allows one to conceive of humanity and Jesus the Christ in a fully evolutionary perspective without loss of an emphasis on the particularity of the Incarnation. 相似文献
16.
Joshua M. Moritz 《Zygon》2014,49(2):348-380
Does an affirmation of theistic evolution make the task of theodicy impossible? In this article, I will review a number of ancient and contemporary responses to the problem of evil as it concerns animal suffering and suggest a possible way forward which employs the ancient Jewish insight that evil—as resistance to God's will that results in suffering and alienation from God's purposes—precedes the arrival of human beings and already has a firm foothold in the nonhuman animal world long before humans are ever tempted to go astray. This theological intuition is conferred renewed relevance in light of the empirical reality of evolutionary gradualism and continuity and in view of the recent findings of cognitive ethology. Consequently, I suggest that taking biological evolution seriously entails understanding “moral evil” as a prehuman phenomenon that emerges gradually through the actions and intentions of “free creatures” which—as evolutionary history unfolded—increasingly possessed greater levels of freedom and degrees of moral culpability. 相似文献
17.
后现代心理学思想的基本观点 总被引:18,自引:0,他引:18
在后现代文化思潮的冲击下,一些从事后现代心理学思想研究的心理学工作者。扬弃了科学主义心理学家的原则方场和研究范式,超越了其理论误区和视界局限。由于他们的方法论基础大相径庭.所以在心理学的专业知识、研究对象、探究方法、临床应用、科学定位等诸多方面,二者存在着明显的分歧。 相似文献
18.
Ted Peters 《Zygon》2018,53(3):691-710
Did the God of the Bible create a Darwinian world in which violence and suffering (disvalue) are the means by which the good (value) is realized? This is Christopher Southgate's insightful and dramatic formulation of the theodicy problem. In addressing this problem, the Exeter theologian rightly invokes the Theology of the Cross in its second manifestation, that is, we learn from the cross of Jesus Christ that God is present to nonhuman as well as human victims of predation and extinction. God co‐suffers with creatures in their despair, abandonment, physical suffering, and death. What I will add with more force than Southgate is this: the Easter resurrection is a prolepsis of the eschatological new creation, and it is God's new creation which retroactively determines past creation. Although this does not eliminate the theodicy question, it lessens its moral sting. 相似文献
19.
by Rodney D. Holder 《Zygon》2009,44(1):115-132
The German theologian and martyr Dietrich Bonhoeffer is not widely known for engaging with scientific thought, having been heavily influenced by Karl Barth's celebrated stance against natural theology. However, during the period of his maturing theology in prison Bonhoeffer read a significant scientific work, Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker's The World View of Physics. From this he gained two major insights for his theological outlook. First, he realized that the notion of a \"God of the gaps\" is futile, not just in science but in other areas of human inquiry. Second, he felt that an infinite universe, as considered by science, would be self-subsistent and could exist as if there were no God. Bonhoeffer replaced Barth's radical critique of religion with the even more extreme view that it is a mere passing phase in history that grown-up humanity can dispense with. At the same time Bonhoeffer began an important critique of Barth's reaction, namely, the latter's retreat to a \"positivism of revelation.\" While Bonhoeffer did not go quite as far as one might like, his approach opened up hopeful avenues for an answer to \"the liberal question\" and even a revived place for some kind of natural theology. 相似文献
20.
Rudolf B. Brun 《Zygon》2007,42(3):701-714
In the first part of this essay I sketch a view on cosmogenesis from the perspective of modern science, emphasizing, first, that the laws of nature are outcomes of the history of nature, not imposed on nature from outside of nature; and, second, that the universe, including human beings, is the result of a single, natural process. It consistently brings forth novelty through a probabilistic sequence of syntheses. Consequently, the new emerges from the unification of elements that were previously unified. This universal creative process is both probabilistic and nonlinear. It is probabilistic (historical) because each creative event occurs within a cohort of also possible events. It is nonlinear because the new has qualities that its elements in isolation do not possess. I refer to this model of understanding cosmogenesis as strict naturalism. In the second part of the essay I argue that deistic and theistic models of cosmogenesis cannot cope with strict naturalism because they exclude teleology and supernatural interference in the creative process. In contrast to deism and theism, I show that Christianity is capable of integrating strict naturalism. To do that I focus on the Christian notion of incarnation. At the center of this reflection is the attempt to increase the understanding of Christian faith that only the Word of God creates. 相似文献