<p>> > > At 08:24 AM 12/27/2006, Gregory Arago wrote: > Could someone at this ASA list > please provide a definition or link to a definition of ‘cosmological > evolution’? My curiosity connects with a comment I made earlier this > year: “Frivolously applying ‘evolution,’ for example, to societies, runs > the danger of reductionism, just as raising biological ideas to > cosmological explanations suffers from idealistically inappropriate > transferability.” It would seem that the way a theist speaks about > ‘cosmological evolution’ would be dramatically different from the way a > non-theist speaks about it. Or is this not so? Would it be inaccurate > to say that theistic theories of cosmological evolution are likewise > “shrouding in scientific words” their own particular interpretations of > God’s creation? ~ Arago > @ It wouldn't be inaccurate to say that in many cases, I'm > sure. You may have had more luck if you had us!
ed search words like > Cosmogenesis or Gaia philosophy or Gaia "science" > :) > For instance: > Cosmogenesis - Pierre Teilhard > de Chardin a Jesuit priest-theologian and a distinguished > geologist-paleontologist > "..The main thrust of Teilhard's gnosis was a foundational > understanding of the Universe, which was expressed in his theory of > Cosmogenesis. According to Teilhard, the universe is no longer to be > considered a static order, but rather a universe __in process__. And it > is a continuing, upslope trajectory of evolution that Teilhard declares a > cosmogenesis. The process of Teilhard's holistic cosmos is broken > into the following categories: the Without and Within of things; the > evolution of matter, life, consciousness; and the Omega Point. .. > > "..As Teilhard said, "the universe is no longer an Order but a > Process. The Cosmos has become a Cosmogenesis." For Teilhard th!
e > long dreamed-of-higher life, that which has been considered as
holy, had > hitherto been sought Above now directs itself toward the Ahead. ... > The Ahead is present in the cyclical process of the universe. > ... > Teilhard especially considers that the deeply engrained notion of > *original sin* "translates, personifies...the perennial and > universal law of imperfection which operates in mankind in virtue of > its being in the process of becoming." ...the > creature... along with the cosmos...is in process. ...Teilhard notes > that "Evil, in all its forms...injustice, inequality, suffering, > death...ceases theoretically to be outrageous from the moment when > *Evolution becoming a Genesis*... displays itself as the...price of an > *immense triumph.*" ...For Teilhard, the tragic, real evil in > this life occurs when humanity fails to acquire a sense of the true value > of the universe. ... > ..Using Teilhardian language: the "process cannot achieve > stability!
until, over the entire globe, the human quantum has not merely > closed the circle upon itself... but has become organically > totalized." Only through collectivization (collective > cooperation) can humanity achieve this total, planetary development of > the noosphere. It cannot be built by people who think only of themselves; > yet every person "on earth shares, in (*hirself*), in the > universal heightening of consciousness." And finally, using > anthropomorphic terms, Teilhard believes that the noosphere is not only > the "stuff of the Universe...not only of *men,* but of the *Man* who > is to be born tomorrow." And through the efforts of humanity > building the noosphere, the earth "finds its soul." > .." > > http://www.bizcharts.com/stoa_del_sol/plenum/plenum_2.html > ~ Janice ... who would bet the farm > that those who buy into this Cosmogenesis theory are the same sorts of > !
"Greenie" mentalities who embrace Biocentrism (the belief th
at > all life, or even the whole universe living or otherwise taken as a > whole, is equally valuable and humanity is not the center of existence. > Hence, humanity is no more valuable than say, mice. ) > > > > > > </p><p>Of course it's impossible to know the thinking of everyone who buys into Teilhard's ideas - including many who haven't read him 1st hand! But Teilhard himself can't be characterized as a "biocentrist" in the sense in which you're using the term. </p>
George L. Murphy
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Dec 27 16:27:02 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Dec 27 2006 - 16:27:02 EST