Considerations

Understanding politics, finance prediction, dating rules, marcom marketing, and the Israel conflict by a global writing team

Considerations header image 2

Life, the Universe, and Everything in World Politics

July 3rd, 2007 · 27 Comments · Politics, Religion

understanding politics, global environmental politics, politics and international relations,   theory of international politics, american government and politics, global change and politics, comparative government and politics, analyzing politics, understanding american politics, history of politics in americaScience and theology have always seemed to conflict, particularly with regards to the universe and the meaning of our existence in world politics, conservative politics, and understanding politics in America.

Many religious people believe that, if the universe in general and humanity specifically were created seemingly at random through the Big Bang and evolution, then existence itself is meaningless. Believers dismiss the scientific evidence because they do not like the only reasonable conclusions that, to them, result from these premises. However, this is a logical fallacy. Once cannot ignore a fact simply because one does not like what an acceptance of that fact may mean.

Scientist-theologians take a more balanced approach by stating that people must first deduce the factual basis of the universe and then make theological and philosophical deductions based on the evidence. (The opinion that "God caused the Big Bang" is a simplified view of this thinking.) Another example of this approach is described in this Salon article:

...more and more physicists point to various laws of nature that have to be calibrated just right for stars and planets to form and for life to appear. For instance, if gravity were just slightly stronger, the universe would have collapsed long before life evolved. But if gravity were a tiny bit weaker, no galaxies or stars could have formed. If the strong nuclear force had been slightly different, red giant stars would never produce the fusion needed to form heavier atoms like carbon, and the universe would be a vast, lifeless desert. Are these just happy coincidences? The late cosmologist Fred Hoyle called the universe "a put-up job." Princeton physicist Freeman Dyson has suggested that the universe, in some sense, "knew we were coming."

Religious people who appreciate science believe that the fine-tuning of the universe that enables it to support life -- albeit, as far as we know, on one planet out of trillions -- is proof that the universe was designed. This, of course, is one small step away from stating that a Creator God exists.

But the anthropic principle in cosmology stands in the way of making theological statements based on this scientific observation. The principle essentially states that if the universe's fine-tuning had been slightly off, then we would not be here in the first place to observe that it had been off. If there had been a 0.00000001% chance that the universe would randomly develop the needed characteristics to sustain life, then the scientific response is that "we lucked out" -- that 0.00000001% chance, in fact, occurred. The complex nature of the universe, then, is not proof of a Creator God.

I'm a liberally-religious Jew and someone who, particularly as a former journalist, is passionate about discovering factual, objective truth whenever possible. But I don't see an inherent contradiction between the two because religion and science, to me, operate in completely different realms. The two systems can rarely, if ever, relate to each other successfully in each other's paradigms. Religion, at its best, can provide the basis for ethical systems and philosophical understandings -- the indescribable, spiritual underpinnings of existence. Science can teach us the physical basis of existence and improve our daily lives through technology.

Ne'er the twain shall meet, and they do not need to. Whenever religion attempts to enroach upon science, religion places itself in peril. The myths of religion are not science -- they are metaphors that teach ethical, personal and societal precepts.

Tags: true religion, jewish religion, religion clothing, conservative politics, religion t shirts, religion brand, world politics, gcse religion

Now Available: E-Book download: "Let­ters from Israel: An Amer­i­can journalist’s adven­tures in the Holy Land."

Every little bit helps! Any donations to help us keep writing are much appreciated:


VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Share/Bookmark

Related posts:

  1. Product Life-Cycle Theory and Project Life-Cycle Definition
  2. How Arabs are Different in World Politics
  3. Life Under Rocket Fire
  4. World Politics: World in 2025
  5. Hairstyles in Religion and World Politics

Tags:

27 Comments so far ↓

  • gary key

    In either instance rather it be the­o­log­i­cal or scientific.We’er all still guess­ing so lets leave it up to some­one who really knows.GOD  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Maureen Burgess

    I have put together a pre­sen­ta­tion show­ing images of the uni­verse, an atom, and a strand of DNA. The largest and the small­est things we can con­ceive of are iden­ti­cal. Within us dwells a uni­ver­sal con­scious­ness where every­thing is known. We have the abil­ity to trans­form our ideas into real­ity and to per­ceive all that is in our real­ity. We share a spirit among all life as well. Sci­ence and reli­gion are not con­tin­gent on our full under­stand­ing of the dis­tinct dif­fer­ences or gen­eral sim­i­lar­i­ties of both. We are evolv­ing to a bet­ter under­stand­ing of that for which we came here to learn. The pur­pose of our phys­i­cal form is to acknowl­edge that there are phys­i­cal lim­i­ta­tions we must over­come to blend with the spirit of our future des­tiny.  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Lauren

    I may be young, for I am only 13 years of age, but I have a the­ory that sug­gests how reli­gion and sci­ence can prove each other to be fac­tual. For instance, one idea is that The Big Bang hap­pened, but the rea­son in hap­pened is because of God. As a Catholic, I believe in God, but as a stu­dent, I believe in many of the log­i­cal and proven sci­en­tific find­ings and such, so I try my hard­est to put them together, rather than choose one and call the other myth­i­cal or metaphor­i­cal. I do agree, how­ever, that reli­gion for many peo­ple can pro­vide some eth­i­cal or moral foun­da­tions, for as humans we have a desire for some­thing to believe in. but hey, im still a kid, so im still learn­ing and try­ing to fig­ure things out on my own. :)   (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • lauren

    i dis­agree with the thing that says that reli­gious ppl dont like the big bang the­ory because it means that life is mean­ing­less and they dont like it. we dont believe the big bang the­ory because its not true, not because we dont like it. also what about the “myths of reli­gion”? theyre not myths. theyre true. oh ya, and how small of a chance is it that the uni­verse formed PERFECTLY right for us?? so small that it seems a stretch to deem it “lucky”. btw, how did the big bang occur? what caused that? the big bang doesnt even explain the uni­verse fully.  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Ardit

    big bang is ture and does not con­traa­dict reli­gion.
    if you want to see sci­ence and reli­gion prov­ing each other, go to http://www.quranmiracles.com  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Jeff

    I think you should check out Teil­hard de Chardin’s Divine Milieu. While cer­tainly writ­ten from a Catholic per­spec­tive (he was a Jesuit priest, after all), his think­ing isn’t far off from the idea of tikkun olam, and he sees no con­tra­dic­tion in sci­ence and reli­gion – or inte­grat­ing the two.  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • alinaphoenix

    I pre­fer to pur­sue my under­stand­ing of God through logic and sci­ence. All mat­ter is made up of mol­e­cules, is made up of atoms, is made up of pro­tons, neu­trons and elec­trons, is made up of quarks, is made up of a sin­gu­lar energy. It is this sin­gu­lar energy that com­prises and com­poses all of exis­tence that I choose to label God. It is every one and every thing and its answers are self evi­dent. Does God judge? Observe! Does the sun cease to shine on the sin­ner? Does the earth open to swal­low him at his feet? No! There is no judge­ment. The sun shines on all, and all is accepted. What each chooses to do is their own, and we live the con­se­quences of our actions. The only hell that exists is the hell that we imag­ine and cre­ate for ourselves.

    I could go on … but I’ve said enough for now. Thank you for allow­ing me to share my perspective!

    Namaste,
    Lina

    PS … If God is the sub­stance that com­poses and cre­ates lit­er­ally every­thing … that means that you and I are God, too. We are the same energy. We cre­ate. What we cre­ate is up to us.

    automaticlifechanges.com  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Wynand Morgan

    You either believe in God or you don’t, so stop mak­ing excuses for why you don’t serve Him com­pletely. “In the begin­ning God cre­ated the heav­ens and the earth”. Sim­ple! How He did it is not that sim­ple to us yet. If you have a plasma TV for instance, and do not know how it is made, do you doubt or ques­tion the fact that some­body made it? No, you would be called names with a less-intelligent mean­ing to it.
    Judge­ment is def­i­nitely com­ing, no doubt. We are liv­ing in a time of God’s grace. As long as you are still alive, you still have a chance to except Him as Sav­iour. No other way to heaven, which by the way, does exist, just as sure as hell does. If you are try­ing to under­stand God through logic and sci­ence, you will never get to know the One true God, Jesus Christ. You will end up with a false god which you have cre­ated.
    Get to know God and His power, and sci­ence will start mak­ing more sense to you. You can not approach this the other way around.
    God is real! God is with us! God is call­ing to you! Praise His name for­ever, He is wor­thy! Let the whole earth rejoice, for He reigns!  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • jhjkhl

    sadis­tic if u believe in fiery hell, and twisted, ANY god tht wud cre­ate humans to pun­ish mil­lions to hell for­ever is NOT accept­able and if it does exist then i am deeply hurt by “god” and cnt believe he wud do tht espe­cially to nice ppl hu just dont believe its just not morally right  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • dark matter

    reli­gion is aload of shit , god is not real, how could some thing called god cre­ate. the uni­verse is made up of gases, atoms, pro­tons until they col­lide together things start to cre­ate  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Donna

    Attempt­ing to move the moun­tain rather than myself is like try­ing to sum up the uni­verse rather than observ­ing it from my lim­ited per­spec­tive. When I was a child, I thought of myself as a speck of dust in a shoe box in the back of a dusty closet. Then I had to imag­ine my closet in a house, in a yard, on a street, in a town, in a state, on a con­ti­nent, on the planet, in the solar sys­tem, in the galaxy, in a big­ger shoe box, in a closet, in a house, in a town.…and so on…i.e.… the ever expand­ing uni­verse. A child can imag­ine it. It is the adult who believes it has to end some­where, and of course, it ends with anthro­po­mor­phic char­ac­ter­is­tics applied to imag­ined mat­ter. We want to be as gods, so we con­struct gods in the image of our­selves. God knows me because I am cre­ated from God. I will spend eter­nity in try­ing to know God.  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • prof em

    Sci­ence and reli­gious!! Reli­gious is the form of sci­ence of some kind of invin­ci­ble realm.. Sci­ence is struc­tural form of exist­ing realm.. Inter­fer­ence of reli­gious to the science(one sci­ence over another) is some­how hap­pe­nend due to imper­fect meta­mor­pho­sis of mat­ter and time of space..  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Jeff

    Sam, “reli­gious myths” should not be reduced to mere “metaphor.” I know you may think it only a seman­tic argu­ment, but it’s one that need be made. A metaphor is flow­ery lan­guage used instead of the plain and sim­ple truth. If truths revealed to us through reli­gion were so plain and sim­ple, how­ever, we wouldn’t need need “myths” (yes, I real­ize you’re using a “tech­ni­cal” definition).

    The truths to which reli­gions point (and nearly all reli­gions are ulti­mately, I believe, in agree­ment over the basics) can­not be – or as yet have not been, any­way – divined by sci­en­tific inquiry. Yet, that does not mean scrip­tures are wholly a-historical fan­tasies lack­ing verac­ity or that their writ­ers did not believe in the lit­eral truth of most, or at least some, of the ideas in their works.

    Indeed, the idea of reli­gion as metaphor has two enor­mous draw­backs. First, it implies that the com­posers of reli­gious tra­di­tion (whether it be scrip­ture or oral tra­di­tion) under­stood truths that they decided must be clothed in metaphor. That is to say, they were gnos­tics, pos­ses­sors of secret knowl­edge that has been lost because they didn’t pass it down in words that mean lit­er­ally what they meant. This, of course, is unlikely at best, requir­ing more faith than many reli­gious beliefs themselves.

    Sec­ond, religion-as-metaphor doesn’t last. The Greeks, we hear, thought of their reli­gion metaphor­i­cally for cen­turies. Now, the only peo­ple who believe in those gods are Hel­lenist revival­ist pagans, and even most of them prob­a­bly don’t believe in the lit­eral truth of the Greek myths.

    To be sure, a lit­eral inter­pre­ta­tion of scrip­tures and oral tra­di­tions does them a dis­ser­vice, triv­i­al­iz­ing the truths to which they point. On the other end of the scale, how­ever, is what you sug­gest: reli­gious beliefs as noth­ing more than alle­gories, para­bles, fables, fairy tales.

    Your descrip­tion thus com­ports well with the argu­ments of “strong,” or what I term “evan­gel­i­cal,” athe­ists. God is reduced to Santa Claus, holy scrip­tures to children’s books, faith­ful fol­low­ers to deluded nincompoops.

    If we allow all “myths” to be reduced to metaphor, scrip­tures are mean­ing­less. The tra­di­tions that rely on those scrip­tures are thus mean­ing­less, and so, too, our reli­gious actions. Sacra­ments and reli­gious ser­vices become a waste of time. Belief is exposed as mere delu­sion. Truth is reduced to that which has been expe­ri­enced. Exis­tence loses its mys­tery, and along with that, we lose insight into things sci­ence has yet to explain: life and death, con­scious­ness, agency.

    I there­fore sug­gest that while some reli­gious myths may, in fact, be para­bles, metaphors, most are a blend of the range of human expe­ri­ences and ways of record­ing those expe­ri­ences: his­tory, music, sto­ry­telling, poetry, art. To see reli­gion solely as a mech­a­nism for describ­ing ethics is to remove the savor from the salt.  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • H Djaja

    Know­ing God is not a reli­gion, but rela­tion with the cre­ator of the uni­verse, doesn’t mat­ter you bilieve or not, who Jesus is really our sav­iour of our life, and faith is not depend on our capa­bil­ity to under­stand with our small brain, God Bless You All  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Lee

    Our God who loves us made all this!  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • D Man

    There is proof of a god. It says in a book thou­sands of years old. You can even get an old Bible from the 1700’s and com­pare it with this:
    1) Take up a Bible and read Rev­e­la­tions
    That’s pretty much all there is to it. It will prove EVERYTHING! I mean, it tells every­thing that has hap­pened to us. It describes air­planes and even the Euro cur­rency. It says that when fly­ing machines and many coun­tries that use the same cur­rency exist, the end is near. It has lots of stuff from the past AND future. It is really easy to com­pare. And let’s say your a non believer. So what? What will it hurt you to try to find God? You give noth­ing up because you believe in noth­ing. So what do you have to lose?  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • vinoth kumar

    there is a god who cre­ates us and even the uni­verse a man can say there is no god but can’t give a proof for it but a man who saya god ios there can give a proof for it  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Jesu

    I feel that it is not any rev­e­la­tion that made reli­gion to emerge, but it is mere fear upon human about his/her fate that caused reli­gions to emerge, sui generis. Expe­ri­ence with num­ber of per­sons por­trays that each and every one moves his/her selec­tion out of either fear or anger or some sort of greed­i­ness. In his/her pur­suit of his/her own selec­tion, he/she uses reli­gion, god and the like. It is not only reli­gion but one’s lan­guage, caste, race etc. that one uses to achieve one’s own selec­tion.
    In short, each and every believer of god unfail­ingly live the real­ity of chance in the name of prov­i­dence. Of course there are gen­uine ones, but their strength is very very minor­ity.  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Joshua

    It is wise­men and peace­mak­ers who cre­ated the wide­spread orga­nized reli­gions that are prac­ticed today. It is a fact that all of our reli­gious texts and teach­ing, regard­less of their ref­er­ence source, were writ­ten by man. So why then are there so many peo­ple on both sides con­demn­ing views of oth­ers. Do any of our reli­gions pro­mote this? I think not. I feel peo­ple should be sat­is­fied in what­ever gives them com­fort so long as it does not hurt any other. None of us can con­vert the minds of every­one, and try­ing to do so can only cause mis­ery. There is not one sin­gle per­son in this vast world of ours that knows the answers to our great ques­tions, and any­one who claims he does is made to look fool­ish. My respect how­ever will always go to those ambi­tious many that use what we have avail­able to hum­b­ley search for truth, know­ing that that search will never end. God and true faith can not ever be dis­proved any more than sci­en­tific fact can, but every inter­est­ing thing we can learn makes life worth liv­ing every­day. Think of how much more we can accom­plish if we try to under­stand all views instead of try­ing to fig­ure out why they are wrong. I learn a great deal daily from lis­ten­ing to the views of others,and I wish the same for any won­der­ing souls. Thanx for tak­ing the time in your life to read and lis­ten. PEACE.  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • A. Banerjee

    The ende­vour to con­ceive the cre­ation of uni­verse through the lens of mys­ti­cism in the form of God or its dif­fer­ent variants,leaves me with the mil­lion dol­lar ques­tion that if God has cre­ated every­thing de-novo,then we should rather train our thoughts to search for that who is even more pow­er­ful to have cre­ated God & so on ———-to no rea­son­able con­clu­sion.  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Matt

    The real ques­tion is: Did God cre­ate Man in God’s image, or did Man cre­ate God in Man’s image?

    I per­son­ally do not fol­low reli­gion, and I do not believe in God as depicted in Chris­t­ian faiths. I do not believe in witch­craft and magic, as believ­ing so is a fal­lacy of man which has hin­dered our devel­op­ment and slowed our tech­ni­cal progression.

    Once life on another planet is found (and it will be found) the entire foun­da­tion of reli­gion will crum­ble; that sim­ple ele­gant notion that every­thing was cre­ated for us. The sim­ple truth is it wasn’t.

    Watch this youtube video, it explains my point quite well.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNekfKfth6Y  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • kaaata

    To sum it all “GOD exist”. He made us in his own image and like­ness. We are his sons and daugh­ters called to do his will and obey his com­mands. Before you were formed in your mother’s womb he knows you. Believe it or not He shall come as a judge one day to judge and reign on this earth with his chil­dren. Ask­ing a ques­tion of who made the uni­verse is the worst thing any man can do to him or her­self cos it will make you lose ur focus and des­tiny.
    No man can be able to see were the foun­da­tions of this earth are and of the uni­verse but he said in the bible that he laid a foun­da­tion . I know it sounds like a fal­lacy but you either live to expe­ri­ence his com­ing or you res­ur­rect to face his judg­ment. The bible said he who has an ear let him hear. It pains me when i hear a mere mor­tal doubt­ing the exis­tence of God but it shall be like a thief in the night when he comes. Dont say no one told you.  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • esaswe ASHA

    god is none but the result of an absolute and aware cos­mic con­cious­ness, as pre­vi­ously stated, the atom is iden­ti­cal to the uni­ver­sal struc­ture, in which time is not per­cieved and space is an illu­sion of our cor­rupted empiri­cism– peace and love-everyone has a piece of god in their heart– avoid exis­ten­tial cri­sis, cover the truth  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Sanjeev Singhal

    The God and nature has seprate iden­tity as per my opin­ion, bcos Nature has its phys­i­cal exis­tance and God is a beleife.
    Uni­verse has its phys­i­cal exis­tance and its a crea­ture of Nature by Big bang.
    We can do more deep study of the cre­ation through Hindu mithol­ogy which are based on total scin­tific bases, their liv­ing, think­ing and all about the life style.
    If any­body wants to know more, we can dis­cuss in details.  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • George I.Ibardaloza

    If we can see that the uni­verse with an imme­suarable with the num­ber known by human. so one thing is for sure that there is a Supreme Being how cre­ate all of this because it is more wiser to believe with an intel­lien­gent mind that there a mighty who make all that we can see in the uni­verse. visit our web­site: http://www.theoldpath.com
    tnx.  (Quote)

    VA:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
  • Sam Scott

    San­jeev, just play­ing Devil’s advo­cate: Could not nature be God? (Baruch Spin­oza thought so.)  (Quote)

    VN:F [1.9.3_1094]
    Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Leave a Comment

Get Adobe Flash playerPlugin by wpburn.com wordpress themes