<html>
<body>
Thanks Jack.<br><br>
I don't think the book characterizes reality as the result of mindless
randomness. But here's a question: if the universe is an
"intelligent system," how did it get started? Was the big bang
caused by something else? This can lead to infinite regression. <br><br>
My argument with scientists is not with what they do or how they do it.
It's when they step outside their own discipline and attempt to argue
theology which is difference from science. Us theologians also need to be
careful in evaluating science! Galileo found that out the hard way!
<br><br>
Saying "God created heaven and earth" is not a statement about
science. it's a faith statement that accords value to all of creation,
whatever it looks like. <br><br>
Thanks again for your comments.<br><br>
John<br><br>
At 08:30 PM 5/16/2012, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">John,<br><br>
I appreciate your insights regarding the book. I have no real
interest in debating string theory or Theory M. There are those
whom I respect who have profound questions regarding them and certainly
they struggle with any ability to confirm the theory in practice, instead
relying on mathematics to "prove" their points.<br><br>
It is easy for secular scientist to pooh pooh the intelligent design
arguments as they are, for the most part, presented by those who are more
literalist in their theology. They tend to externalize God which is
just another form of the two story universe. But for me, the
intelligent design is really about the entire universe as an intelligent
system. It is not a mindless result of random collisions. I
won't go into the depth that is required to present the alternative, but
it is there. <br><br>
The more interesting point is that mindless randomness means there is no
basis for the emergence of values. In deed, there is no meaning nor
purpose for anything. But our personal experience tells us
something else. And is not simply a way for us to live with
meaninglessness of reality. I won't expand on this because this is
not the forum for a long discussion. But we shouldn't allow the
scientist to set all the rules for how to debate these
questions.<br><br>
Thanks for the review!<br><br>
Jack<br>
On May 16, 2012, at 5:52 PM,
<a href="mailto:jlepps@pc.jaring.my">jlepps@pc.jaring.my</a>
wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Some thoughts you might
enjoy:<br><br>
<br>
<div align="center"><b><a name="_ftnref1"></a>Reflections on “The Grand
Design[1]</b>”<br><br>
<i>May 2012<br><br>
</i></div>
Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinov have undertaken to challenge the
“Intelligent Design” theory of creation with the latest science from
Quantum Physics and the M-Theory. In my opinion, they deserve each other.
One says an intelligent being created and runs the cosmos. The other says
no such being is necessary to account for reality as we know it
scientifically. <br><br>
Neither “side” seems aware of the distinction between faith statements as
expressive vs. faith statements as explanatory. The former occurs in
rituals, creeds, worship, and hymns and is primarily intended to express
one’s interior posture of affirmation. They are poetic and not intended
to be taken as literal. The latter can be found in theological
formulations that attempt to provide a rational understanding of that
posture. Theological formulations are intended to be taken literally and
tend to provide a viable model of reality (“model-dependent realism” is
the mode of Hawking and Mlodinov) which is compatible with contemporary
scientific understanding. <br><br>
The Intelligent design movement misses this distinction and tends to take
expressive statements as literal, sometimes even missing the deep truth
they express. The scientists also miss the distinction and wind up
creating a straw man which they demolish with considerable relish and
humor. <br><br>
<a name="_ftnref2"></a>The book, however, is a useful history of
scientific achievement, and filled with informative and entertaining
graphics. When compared with the works of Brian Greene[2], the book seems
a bit simplistic; still it’s a useful introduction to the present state
of physics.<br><br>
Particularly interesting is its perspective of “model-dependent realism.”
Instead of attempting to establish the external reality of anything
outside of the viewer, it says that what we perceive is shaped by the
brain which uses a model to coordinate and make sense of our perceptions.
Whether or not the model accords with some external reality is beyond the
possibility of establishing. Instead one establishes the usefulness of
the model in accounting for experience. There are four criteria a model
must meet to be regarded as accurate: 1) elegance; 2) contains few
arbitrary or adjustable elements; 3) agrees with and explains all
existing observations; and 4) makes detailed predictions about future
observations that can disprove or falsify the model if they are not borne
out (p.51). Unfortunately the book does not show how intelligent design
fails to meet those same criteria for validity. Still, the authors insist
that no God hypothesis is required to account for all we observe,
including creation<i> ex nihilo</i> (which, though we do not observe it,
seems to be the way things got started). <br><br>
It may be that the book is most useful if the reader dispenses with the
theological issues the authors purport to raise. It is indeed a useful
capsule of string theory and M-theory along with quantum physics, and
provides a useful look into a model of reality that may hold possibility
for the future. Maybe the theology was just a gimmick to attract readers
to a subject that is covered more adequately elsewhere, and is
essentially uninteresting to most. It seems to have succeeded as a
marketing effort since the book is currently on the NY Times best seller
list at #18 of 20.<br><br>
<br>
<a name="_ftn1"></a>[1] Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow, <b><u>The
Grand Design</u></b><a name="_ftn1"></a> (New York: Bantam Books,
2012)<br>
<a name="_ftn2"></a>[2] See his <b><u>The Elegant Universe</u></b> (New
York: Vintage Books, 2000), <b><u>The Fabric of the Cosmos</u></b> (New
York: Vintage Books, 2004), <b><u>The Hidden
Reality</u></b><a name="_ftn2"></a> (New York: Penguin, 2011). He also
has fascinating presentations on TV, the Discovery Channel. <br>
<br>
Your responses are more welcome.<br><br>
John<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Dialogue mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net">
Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net" eudora="autourl">
http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net</a>
</blockquote><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Dialogue mailing list<br>
Dialogue@lists.wedgeblade.net<br>
<a href="http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net" eudora="autourl">
http://lists.wedgeblade.net/listinfo.cgi/dialogue-wedgeblade.net</a>
</blockquote></body>
</html>