From: Steve Petermann (steve@spetermann.org)
Date: Fri Oct 03 2003 - 16:09:24 EDT
Science as science is not really interested in pragmatic concerns. However,
people are. Worldwide religion provides a powerful force in individual
lives and culture. Paul Tillich said that religion is the substance of
culture and culture is the form of religion. He could say that because he
saw religion as the repository of humanity's ultimate concerns. Whatever,
we are ultimately concerned with will drive everything else, including the
shape of culture.
Worldwide billions of people look to religion to help them discern a sense
of themselves and their place in the cosmos. Religion does that by pointing
to some sort of teleology grounded in ultimate reality. Religion give
people a sense of being part of something larger than themselves and being
part of an overarching ultimate meaning and purpose.
While the religious right may be wrong in their message, they recognize that
foundations are *very* important to people. It might be relatively easy for
the intelligentsia to accept some level of relativism but that is not so for
the masses. Meyers-Briggs affirms that over 80% of the population are not
particularly good at abstract thinking. That vast majority need others to
help them with the basis for their lives. Religion provides that basis for
many. It does that because religion tells those masses that there is an
ultimate reality that grounds and creates meaning and purpose that reaches
farther than our own special interests. This is what teleology does. Can
humanity thrive without teleology? Who knows? Does it have to?
Now science should not, imo, be driven solely by pragmatic concerns. Its
job is to discern that truth. However practical matters may influence what
science works on and entertains. If teleology is important in the long run
then research projects that entertain that prospect may be of value.
Now there are various forms of teleology. There are deistic forms that
would be considered a weak teleology because the divine is not active after
the inception of the universe. There are strong telic positions like
classic theology that posit supernatural divine action and there are
naturalistic telic schemes where divine action is not heavy handed.
However, if teleology is important for humanity, then however risky or
implausible it may seem, it should be well worth the support of the
scientific community for those research and philosophic endeavors that seek
to affirm that there truly is a powerful active divine presence in our
world, actively involved in the creation of meaning and purpose.
Steve Petermann
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Oct 03 2003 - 16:23:03 EDT