scholarly journals The Philosophical Aspects of the Dialogue between Modern Cosmology and Theology

Discourse ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (5) ◽  
pp. 55-70
Author(s):  
A. V. Nesteruk ◽  
A. V. Soldatov
Keyword(s):  
Human Condition ◽  
Fine Tuning ◽  
Major Theme ◽  
Human Being ◽  
The World ◽  
Modern Cosmology ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Ex Nihilo ◽  
The Universe ◽  
Origin Of The Universe

Introduction. The paper deals with the philosophical problems of the modern dialogue between cosmology and theology. It is argued that no existential contradiction is possible between them as originating in one and the same human condition. The difference between cosmology and theology amounts to the difference in their open-ended hermeneutics of the outer world. It is from within this philosophical conclusion that the hot issue of the dialogue are discussed and some insights are proposed.Methodology and sources. The philosophical analysis is based on the discussion of epistemological issues in modern cosmology and their relevance to theological view of the world. The method is similar to existential phenomenology’s approach to the constitution of the notion of the universe in cosmology and theology as an open-ended hermeneutics of the world.Results and discussion. It is shown that no existential contradiction is possible between two types of hermeneutics as originating in one and the same human condition. It is human being that becomes the major theme of the dialogue between cosmology and theology.On the basis of the conclusions made the paper discusses some “hot” issues in the contemporary cosmology-theology discussion, including: 1) The inseparability of cosmology and theology in justification of the possibility of cosmological knowledge, 2) Fine-tuning, Anthropic principle, fitness of the universe for life, 3) The unknowability of the universe and apophaticism in cosmology, 4) Multiple universes and their ontology, 5) How much of life is in the universe: the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI), exoplanets and theological consequence for multiple incarnations, 6) The origin of the universe in modern scientific cosmology and its relevance to the theologically understood creatio ex nihilo, 7) Consciousness and the universe: can cosmology account for its own possibility without appealing to the theologically understood human capacity in producing an intellectual synthesis of the universe.Conclusion. On the basis of the methods applied to the hot issues in the dialogue between cosmology and theology one concludes that the dialogue between cosmology and theology is an open-ended enterprise related to the fundamentally concealed origins of humanity and universe. The difference is hermeneutics of the universe does not create any contradiction or tension but reflects a dualistic position of humanity in the universe, being an insignificant part of it and at the same time its center of disclosure and manifestation.

Creation Ex Nihilo: Something from Nothing

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vlatko Vedral
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
The World ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Creation ◽  
Ex Nihilo ◽  
The Universe ◽  
Being Religious ◽  
Origin Of The Universe

Every civilization in the history of humanity has had its myth of creation. Humans have a deeply rooted and seemingly insatiable desire to understand not only their own origins but also the origins of other things around them. Most if not all of the myths since the dawn of man involve some kind of higher or supernatural beings which are intimately related to the existence and functioning of all things in the Universe. Modern man still holds a multitude of different views of the ultimate origin of the Universe, though a couple of the most well represented religions, Christianity and Islam, maintain that there was a single creator responsible for all that we see around us. It is a predominant belief in Catholicism, accounting for about one-sixth of humanity, that the Creator achieved full creation of the Universe out of nothing – a belief that goes under the name of creation ex nihilo. (To be fair, not all Catholics believe this, but they ought to if they follow the Pope.) Postulating a supernatural being does not really help explain reality since then we only displace the question of the origins of reality to explaining the existence of the supernatural being. To this no religion offers any real answers. If you think that scientists might have a vastly more insightful understanding of the origin of the Universe compared to that of major religions, then you’d better think again. Admittedly, most scientists are probably atheists (interestingly, more than 95% in the United Kingdom) but this does not necessarily mean that they do not hold some kind of a belief about what the Creation was like and where all this stuff around us comes from. The point is that, under all the postulates and axioms, if you dig far enough, you’ll find that they are as stumped as anyone else. So, from the point of view of explaining why there is a reality and where it ultimately comes from, being religious or not makes absolutely no difference – we all end up with the same tricky question. Every time I read a book on the religious or philosophical outlook of the world I cannot help but recognize many ideas in there as related to some ideas that we have in science.

Imaginings

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 17-30
Author(s):  
Kelly James Clark
Keyword(s):  
Religious Tradition ◽  
Second Order ◽  
Fine Tuning ◽  
Intellectual Humility ◽  
First Order ◽  
Natural Processes ◽  
Empirically Supported ◽  
Group Violence ◽  
The World ◽  
The Universe

In Branden Thornhill-Miller and Peter Millican’s challenging and provocative essay, we hear a considerably longer, more scholarly and less melodic rendition of John Lennon’s catchy tune—without religion, or at least without first-order supernaturalisms (the kinds of religion we find in the world), there’d be significantly less intra-group violence. First-order supernaturalist beliefs, as defined by Thornhill-Miller and Peter Millican (hereafter M&M), are “beliefs that claim unique authority for some particular religious tradition in preference to all others” (3). According to M&M, first-order supernaturalist beliefs are exclusivist, dogmatic, empirically unsupported, and irrational. Moreover, again according to M&M, we have perfectly natural explanations of the causes that underlie such beliefs (they seem to conceive of such natural explanations as debunking explanations). They then make a case for second-order supernaturalism, “which maintains that the universe in general, and the religious sensitivities of humanity in particular, have been formed by supernatural powers working through natural processes” (3). Second-order supernaturalism is a kind of theism, more closely akin to deism than, say, Christianity or Buddhism. It is, as such, universal (according to contemporary psychology of religion), empirically supported (according to philosophy in the form of the Fine-Tuning Argument), and beneficial (and so justified pragmatically). With respect to its pragmatic value, second-order supernaturalism, according to M&M, gets the good(s) of religion (cooperation, trust, etc) without its bad(s) (conflict and violence). Second-order supernaturalism is thus rational (and possibly true) and inconducive to violence. In this paper, I will examine just one small but important part of M&M’s argument: the claim that (first-order) religion is a primary motivator of violence and that its elimination would eliminate or curtail a great deal of violence in the world. Imagine, they say, no religion, too.Janusz Salamon offers a friendly extension or clarification of M&M’s second-order theism, one that I think, with emendations, has promise. He argues that the core of first-order religions, the belief that Ultimate Reality is the Ultimate Good (agatheism), is rational (agreeing that their particular claims are not) and, if widely conceded and endorsed by adherents of first-order religions, would reduce conflict in the world.While I favor the virtue of intellectual humility endorsed in both papers, I will argue contra M&M that (a) belief in first-order religion is not a primary motivator of conflict and violence (and so eliminating first-order religion won’t reduce violence). Second, partly contra Salamon, who I think is half right (but not half wrong), I will argue that (b) the religious resources for compassion can and should come from within both the particular (often exclusivist) and the universal (agatheistic) aspects of religious beliefs. Finally, I will argue that (c) both are guilty, as I am, of the philosopher’s obsession with belief. 

Naming the Big Bang

2012 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helge Kragh
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Community ◽  
Big Bang ◽  
Consensus Model ◽  
Initial State ◽  
The Standard Model ◽  
Modern Cosmology ◽  
Fred Hoyle ◽  
The Big Bang ◽  
The Universe ◽  
Origin Of The Universe

The standard model of modern cosmology is known as the hot big bang, a name that refers to the initial state of the universe some fourteen billion years ago. The name Big Bang introduced by Fred Hoyle in 1949 is one of the most successful scientific neologisms ever. How did the name originate and how was it received by physicists and astronomers in the period leading up to the hot big bang consensus model in the late 1960s? How did it reflect the meanings of the origin of the universe, a concept that predates the name by nearly two decades? Contrary to what is often assumed, the name was not an instant success—it took more than twenty years before Big Bang became a household word in the scientific community. When it happened, it was used with different connotations, as is still the case. Moreover, it was used earlier and more frequently in popular than in scientific contexts, and not always relating to cosmology. It turns out that Hoyle’s celebrated name has a richer and more surprising history than commonly assumed and also that the literature on modern cosmology and its history includes many common mistakes and errors. An etymological approach centering on the name Big Bang provides supplementary insight to the historical understanding of the emergence of modern cosmology.

scholarly journals A FÉ CRISTÃ NA CONTEMPORANEIDADE: RUMOS E DESAFIOS

2010 ◽  
Vol 41 (115) ◽  
pp. 345
Author(s):  
Maria Clara Lucchetti Bingemer
Keyword(s):  
Christian Theology ◽  
Christian Faith ◽  
Human Being ◽  
Belief In God ◽  
Religious System ◽  
The World ◽  
Important Trend ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Constituent Elements

Diante do panorama extremamente complexo do campo religioso hoje o documento de Aparecida declara estar o ser humano do século XXI em meio a uma “mudança de época”. Ao lado do processo de secularização, que leva o ser humano a não temer declarar sua ausência de crença em Deus e sua não pertença a qualquer sistema religioso, está igualmente o revival” religioso anárquico e selvagem que fez eclodir seitas e novas propostas “espirituais” dos mais variados perfis, questionando em profundidade a decantada supremacia do monoteísmo cristão no Ocidente. A proposta neste artigo é, depois de uma breve análise da situação da religião no mundo e especialmente no Brasil hoje, refletir sobre a diferença entre fé e religião e como esta reflexão, tomada em sua radicalidade, leva a uma compreensão renovada do que seja a fé cristã e sua identidade no mundo atual. Para chegar a isto, são analisados três elementos constitutivos da fé cristã: a historicidade, a experiência e o testemunho, no desejo de traçar um perfil aproximado de uma tendência importante na teologia cristã hoje, que prefere definir o Cristianismo mais como uma revelação do que como uma religião.ABSTRACT: Before the extremely complex panorama of the religious field today the document of Aparecida declares the human being of the XXI century to be in the mist of an “epoch change”. On the side of the secularização process, that leads the human being not to fear in declaring his lack of belief in God and his not belonging to any religious system, there is also the religious anarchical and wild “revival” that brought out sects and new “spiritual” proposals of the most varied profiles, questioning in depth the decanted supremacy of Christian monotheism in the Occident. The proposal of this article is, after a brief analysis of the situation of religion in the world and especially in Brazil today, to reflect on the difference between faith and religion and how this reflection, taken in its radicality, leads to a renewed understanding of what Christian faith is and its identity in the current world. To arrive at this, three constituent elements of the Christian faith are analyzed: the historicity, the experience and the witness, in the desire to trace a profile that approaches an important trend in the Christian theology, which prefers to define Christianity more as a revelation than as a religion.

Does This Bring Us Back to God?

2021 ◽  
pp. 181-192
Author(s):  
Bruce Ledewitz
Keyword(s):  
Causal Structure ◽  
Public Life ◽  
Final Conclusion ◽  
Process Thought ◽  
Traditional Theism ◽  
The World ◽  
The Future ◽  
Ex Nihilo ◽  
The Universe

The book returns to the question of God within the world of the yes. The reader is given tools to continue the investigation, but no final conclusion is reached on the question of God. David Griffin’s process thought is naturalistic and panentheistic. This view of God shares attributes of traditional theism. But in process thought, God does not create ex nihilo, does not coerce, and remains within the causal structure of nature. Griffin argues that God is a necessary feature of process thought and its endorsement of enduring meaning. Donald Sherburne offers a different view, called “Whitehead Without God.” The book concludes that process thought without God can still renew public life. It remains for us in the future to investigate the mystery of holiness in the universe.

scholarly journals An Inquiry into the Semiotic Thought of Laozi

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-39
Author(s):  
Dong Zhu ◽  
Wei Ren
Keyword(s):  
Social Stability ◽  
Chinese History ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Tao Te Ching ◽  
The World ◽  
Imperial China ◽  
The Universe ◽  
Natural Life ◽  
Origin Of The Universe ◽  
The Way

Abstract Tao Te Ching, the masterpiece of Laozi the renowned philosopher of Pre-Imperial China, plays an important role in Chinese history. Laozi’s philosophy centres on such concepts as ming (names), li (rituals), and dao (the way). Ming, originally developed as a result of human beings’ endeavours to understand the world in which they live and to bring order to their society, has degenerated into the sources of evils and the reason for turbulence when people stop at nothing for fame and fortune; Li, an effective and efficient means for the kings of West Zhou Dynasty to maintain social stability, has become but a collection of empty sign vehicles with the disintegration of rituals and music; Dao concerns Laozi’s metaphysical reflection on the origin of the universe and its ultimate laws. Ming and li are but artificial restraints imposed on human intelligence whereas dao provides the way out. Therefore, to lead a simple and natural life, it is advisable to eliminate ming and li, and worship dao. In semiotic terms, this means that desemiotisation is the solution to the crisis.

Religion and Science in the Parable of the Unjust Steward

1998 ◽  
pp. 166-170
Author(s):  
Eugene S. Poliakov
Keyword(s):  
Human Being ◽  
Religion And Science ◽  
Literal Interpretation ◽  
The World ◽  
The Difference

The Parable of the Unjust Steward should be interpreted allegorically, its literal interpretation shown to be impossible. Certain facts make this parable unique: a lord as the Lord; divine possessions; the symbolism of the house interpreted as a human being; the material principles of the world understood as the governor of a human being; the Lord’s debtors as spiritual teachers of various kinds; theological doctrines with their own theogonic and cosmogonic views, all claiming to know the truth in its wholeness. Their debts consist of their misunderstandings and errors which have caused the difference between them and truth. Examples of the part of the material principles of the world in correcting theological doctrines are adduced. Two different kinds of debt are considered. I conclude that ‘make to yourselves friends of the riches of unrighteousness’ means that the material reasons of the world, the wisdom of this age, must be used for the good of spiritual teachings.

Dualism in Iranian and Christian Traditions

2000 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
François de Blois
Keyword(s):  
Cosmological Models ◽  
The Other ◽  
Human Race ◽  
Indefinite Number ◽  
The World ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Universe ◽  
Origin Of The Universe

Since the time when the human race first began to speculate about the origin of the universe there have been two cosmological models that have seemed particularly attractive to its imagination. One has been to derive everything in the world from a single primal origin, out of which the cosmos, in all its apparent complexity, evolves. The other has been to view the history of the universe as a battle between two opposing forces which contradict and undermine each other. The two views can be called monism and dualism. They are not the only possibilities. There have been systems that posit three, four or an indefinite number of principles, but most of these have also tended to assume one basic pair of opposites with one or more neutral or intermediate principles beside them; this too can be seen as a form of dualism.

scholarly journals EVOLUTIONAL AND CREATION PARADIGMS OF THE ORIGIN OF THE WORLD: HISTORY AND MODERNITY

2020 ◽  
pp. 21-30
Author(s):  
Евгения Викторовна Алёхина
Keyword(s):  
World History ◽  
Dialectical Materialism ◽  
The Past ◽  
Mechanistic Approach ◽  
The World ◽  
History Of ◽  
Intersection Points ◽  
The Individual ◽  
The Universe ◽  
Origin Of The Universe

В статье рассмотрены возникновение и развитие противоборствующих в философской мысли креационного и эволюционного объяснений происхождения Вселенной, жизни и разума. Обращаясь к анализу двух парадигм, автор показала, что они имеют длительную историю противостояния. В наше время, как и в прошлом, эта проблема сводится к альтернативе - либо эволюция как продукт слепой случайности, либо целенаправленное творчество Высшего Разума. В последнем случае есть два варианта: ортодоксальный и модернистский - «телеологический эволюционизм». Обосновывается, что современная постнеклассическая наука все больше определяется социальными, культурными и мировоззренческими основаниями. Одной из точек пересечения трех уровней научного знания является проблема происхождения мира. Противоположные варианты её решения имеют различное соотношение собственно научного (экспериментального) и мировоззренческого аспектов. Эволюционная гипотеза с позиции диалектического материализма не смогла преодолеть редукционизм и наивный реализм механистического подхода. Наличие в указанных парадигмах аксиологического компонента в той или иной степени утверждает или отрицает смысл жизни и достоинство личности. The article examines the emergence and development of the opposing creation and evolutionary explanations of the origin of the universe, life and mind in philosophical thought. Turning to the analysis of the two paradigms, the author showed that they have a long history of opposition. In our time, as in the past, this problem boils down to an alternative - either evolution as a product of blind chance, or purposeful creativity of the Higher Reason. In the latter case, there are two options: orthodox and modernist - «teleological evolutionism». It is substantiated that modern post-non-classical science is increasingly determined by social, cultural and ideological foundations. One of the intersection points of the three levels of scientific knowledge is the problem of the Origin of the World. Opposite solutions to its solution have a different ratio of the scientific (experimental) and worldview aspects. The evolutionary hypothesis could not overcome the reductionism and naive realism of the mechanistic approach from the standpoint of dialectical materialism. The presence of an axiological component in these paradigms, to one degree or another, affirms or denies the meaning of life and the dignity of the individual.

scholarly journals The Joy of Being as Anthropological Practice

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 66-73
Author(s):  
Agapov Oleg D. ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Human Life ◽  
Human Condition ◽  
The Other ◽  
Human Being ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Human Subjectivity ◽  
The World ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Absolute ◽  
The Human Condition

The joy of being is connected with one’s activities aimed at responding to the challenges of the elemental forces and the boundlessness of being, which are independent of human subjectivity. In the context of rising to the challenges of being, one settles to acquire a certain power of being in themselves and in the world. Thus, the joy of being is tied to achieving the level of the “miraculous fecundity” (E. Levinas), “an internal necessity of one’s life” (F. Vasilyuk), magnanimity (M. Mamardashvili). The ontological duty of any human being is to succeed at being human. The joy of being is closely connected to experiencing one’s involvement in the endless/eternity and realizing one’s subjective temporality/finitude, which attunes him to the absolute seriousness in relation to one’s complete realization in life. Joy is a foundational anthropological phenomenon in the structure of ways of experiencing the human condition. The joy of being as an anthropological practice can appear as a constantly expanding sphere of human subjectivity where the transfiguration of the powers of being occurs under the sign of the Height (Levinas) / the Good. Without the possibility of transfiguration human beings get tired of living, immerse themselves in the dejected state of laziness and the hopelessness of vanity. The joy of being is connected to unity, gathering the multiplicity of human life under the aegis of meaning that allows us to see the other and the alien in heteronomous being, and understand the nature of co-participation and responsibility before the forces of being, and also act in synergy with them.The joy of being stands before a human being as the joy of fatherhood/ motherhood, the joy of being a witness to the world in creative acts (the subject as a means to retreat before the world and let the world shine), the joy of every day that was saved from absurdity, darkness and the impersonal existence of the total. Keywords: joy, higher reality, anthropological practices, “the height”, subject, transcendence, practice of coping

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document