Professor wins Templeton prize for maths link to God

by BurnTheShips 9 Replies latest jw friends

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips

    Fascinating! I highlighted a couple of parts I agree with:

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article3540989.ece

    A Polish priest and mathematician who was a friend of the late Pope John Paul II has won the world’s richest academic prize for work that shows how maths can offer circumstantial evidence of God’s existence.

    Professor Michael Heller, 72, a pioneering cosmologist and philosopher specialising in mathematics and metaphysics, received the £820,000 prize yesterday in New York.

    His theories do not so much offer proof of the existence of God as introduce doubt about the material existence of the world around us. He specialises in complex formulae that make it possible to explain everything, even chance, through mathematical calculation.

    According to the Templeton Foundation, which has awarded its prize for Progress toward Research or Discoveries about Spiritual Realities for 35 years, Professor Heller’s research has “pushed at the metaphysical horizons of science”. The prize money is adjusted every year so that it remains greater than the amount given by the Nobel Foundation, which awards the Nobel prizes.

    Professor Heller was nominated for the award by Professor Karol Musiol, Rector of the Jagiellonian University in Cracow, who said: “His unique position as a creatively working scientist and reflective man of religion has brought to science a sense of transcendent mystery and to religion a view of the universe through the broadly open eyes of science.

    “He has introduced a significant notion of theology of science. He has succeeded in showing that religion isolating itself from scientific insights is lame, and science failing to acknowledge other ways of understanding is blind.”

    In a statement yesterday, Professor Heller, a professor in the philosophy faculty at the Pontifical Academy of Theology in Cracow, said: “If we ask about the cause of the universe we should ask about the cause of mathematical laws. By doing so we are back in the great blueprint of God’s thinking about the universe, the question on ultimate causality: why is there something rather than nothing?

    “When asking this question, we are not asking about a cause like all other causes. We are asking about the root of all possible causes.

    “Science is but a collective effort of the human mind to read the mind of God from question marks out of which we and the world around us seem to be made.”

    When he was a boy, Professor Heller’s family were sent to Siberia. His father had built new factories in Poland and joined a group that sabotaged a chemical plant in the south when the Nazis invaded at the start of the Second World War.

    The family feld to Lvov and were sent from there to Siberia by the Russians, where Professor Heller went to primary school. By the time he entered secondary school, the war had ended and he and his family returned to Poland. His father was persecuted again when his son decided to enter a seminary.

    In spite of the suppression of religion in Poland during much of his adult life, he went on to reach the top of his field academically, doing research in universities around the world including Oxford and Liège.

    He worked with Pope John Paul II, when he was Archbishop of Cracow and was one of a number of academics and scientists invited each summer to Castel Gandolfo, the Pope’s summer residence, to debate the latest research in their respective fields.

    His greatest scientific influence has been the philosopher Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, who once wrote: “When God calculates and thinks things through, the world is made.”

    John Templeton, chair of the John Templeton Foundation and son of Sir John Templeton, who established the prize in 1973, said: “Michael Heller’s quest for deeper understanding has led to pioneering breakthroughs in religious concepts and knowledge as well as expanding the horizons of science.”

    Professor Heller, who also worked with John Paul II when he was Archbishop of Cracow, said yesterday that he would donate his prize money to the development of the new Copernicus Centre in Cracow, an academy for research into science and theology.

    The end of time?

    — The work of Professor Heller, above, revolves around the search for a fundamental theory of creation. His research ranges beyond Einstein and into quantum mechanics, cosmology, physics and pure mathematics, including his own version of the Heisenberg equation, below. Although his theories do not prove the existence of God, they may provide circumstantial evidence that He exists

    — So long as the Universe had a beginning, we can suppose it had a creator, he says. But if the Universe is really completely self-contained, having no boundary or edge, it would have neither beginning nor end: it would simply be. What place, then, for a creator?

    — Professor Heller argues against the Newtonian concept of creation, that is, against the idea of an absolute space and an absolute time and of God creating energy and matter at certain times

    — He suggests modern theologians should go back to the traditional doctrine that the creation of the Universe was an act that occurred outside space and time

    Cheers

    Burn

  • Inquisitor
    Inquisitor

    AHhh the Templeton Prize. Rationalists who haven't heard of it should give pause to this quote alone:

    The prize money is adjusted every year so that it remains greater than the amount given by the Nobel Foundation, which awards the Nobel prizes.

    Why try to compete with Nobel Prize money? Is it to make the Templeton Prize more prestigious? Or to lure more bright minds to speak words that lend credibility to a certain worldview?

    Let's see... last year's winner was Canadian Philosopher Charles Taylor who allegedly holds that Western secularism does not suffice in giving human lives meaning. Would you say a Jehovah's Witness would love to quote him as a conversation starter at the doors? I say: "No!" Plenty other fundamentalists would too!

    I'm not saying I would personally disagree with Mr Taylor. After all the issue is not WHO wins the prize, but WHY they win it. WHAT is this Templeton Foundation trying to accomplish? Is the Templeton Foundation ONLY interested in rewarding purely SCIENTIFIC findings? Why has it been said that the founder is a sugar daddy of the conservatives?

    God's Venture Capitalist - Slate.com

    INQ

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips

    Yes, and the Nobel prize was created by a man that wanted a more fitting legacy than being called a "merchant of death". So he funded prizes to encourage expanding the reach of humanity with profits from producing a substance that was designed to blow humans to bits. Apparently he was looking for a bit of redemption.

    The Templeton Prize for Progress Toward Research or Discoveries about Spiritual Realities is a prize given out annually by the Templeton Foundation. Established in 1972, it is awarded to a living person who, in the estimation of the judges, best exemplifies "trying various ways for discoveries and breakthroughs to expand human perceptions of divinity and to help in the acceleration of divine creativity."

    If it helps harmonize spirituality and science and inoculates partisan individuals in both camps then it is a "Nobel" cause, in my estimation.

    A cursory review of writings and biography of David Plotz, the author of the critical article you link, reveals he is not a very impartial bystander, but a rather biased left-wing partisan. The loaded language of the article is an appeal to the heart, and not the head.

    Burn

  • Rapunzel
    Rapunzel

    The Templeton Prize is to the Nobel Prize what The Onion is to serious journalism. When I read that the person in question "specialises in mathematics and metaphysics," I really thought that the article was an exerpt from TheOnion. To say that someone specialises in mathematics and metaphysics is like saying that someone specialises in astronomy and astrology.

    A big problem is with the term metaphysics itself. Its meaning is far from clear; or rather, people use the word to refer to highly divergent concepts. The word metaphysics goes back to Aristotle who wrote books on many subjects. The terrm literally refers to the books of Aristotle after those on physics. In these books [the books that Aristotle wrote after he considered the subject of physics], Aristotle deals with the concept of Being or Existence. As such, the word metaphysics is essentially the same as the word ontology. In his books following the ones on physics, Aristotle grapples with ontology, the "science" of being.

    A problem occurs for the reason that, in popular usage, the word metaphysics/metaphysical is often confused with the word supernatural. It'sprecisely at this point that many problems occur. People use the word "God" when they encounter an insurmountable obstacle in comprehension. No one - no science - can define God. And while no one can disprove the existence of God, neither can anyone prove it. "God" is simply a name that people give to the unknown. Science deals with phenomena that are known [if at least relatively so] or knowable.

  • Burger Time
    Burger Time

    LOOK OUT SCIENCE! HE IS RELIGIOUS, AND ACCORDING TO BEN STIEN HE IS ALREADY EXPELLED!!! POOR FELLA!!

    Oh that's right Ben Stien is a tool.

  • hillary_step
    hillary_step

    Yes, Real One made mention of this in an earlier post. I asked a question of both himself and Perry as to whether they also accept this Catholic Priest to be correct in embracing evolution. A long silence has ensued, which is typical of the partisan away Fundamentalist loonies approach the matter of what is true and what is not.

    HS

  • Burger Time
  • Inquisitor
    Inquisitor
    he is not a very impartial bystander, but a rather biased left-wing partisan. The loaded language of the article is an appeal to the heart, and not the head. - Burn

    Oh did you stumble at the language and avoided the facts?

    The octogenarian Templeton has always been a devout Christian. (His own faith marries the strict Presbyterianism of his childhood with a sunny Norman Vincent Peale-y optimism.)

    Fact or "left-wing bias"?

    Templeton has, almost single-handedly, revived the field of religious science. He gives 100 colleges $10,000 a year to teach courses in science and religion. He offers the same amount to medical schools for classes on "healing and spirituality." The Templeton Lectures send scholars to campuses to opine on faith and science.

    Facts or "left-wing bias"? Do you dispute the founder's aims? The quantity of his contributions? Or the number of beneficiaries?

    He believes in hard science.

    Fact or left-wing bias?

    Favorite projects include a Duke University study on the relationship between prayer and longevity, and research at Johns Hopkins into how meditation alters brain activity. Last year he awarded the Templeton Prize to a respected Australian cosmologist who argues that the structure of the universe reflects intelligent design.

    Fact or left-wing bias?

    the entire enterprise reflects a mad obsessiveness: What to make, for example, of the "Templeton Prizes for Exemplary Papers in Humility Theology"?

    Fact or left-wing bias?

    It pays to go beyond the first three paragraphs, Burno.

    INQ

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips
    Oh did you stumble at the language and avoided the facts?

    NO I did not stumble at the language, but took note of it.

    The octogenarian Templeton has always been a devout Christian. (His own faith marries the strict Presbyterianism of his childhood with a sunny Norman Vincent Peale-y optimism.)
    Fact or "left-wing bias"?

    Fact.

    Templeton has, almost single-handedly, revived the field of religious science. He gives 100 colleges $10,000 a year to teach courses in science and religion. He offers the same amount to medical schools for classes on "healing and spirituality." The Templeton Lectures send scholars to campuses to opine on faith and science.
    Facts or "left-wing bias"? Do you dispute the founder's aims? The quantity of his contributions? Or the number of beneficiaries?

    Facts with a bit of spin. Religious science was not "revived" and certainly not by Templeton.

    He believes in hard science.

    Fact or left-wing bias?

    How the hell does he know what Templeton believes?

    It pays to go beyond the first three paragraphs, Burno.

    I did more than that, I reviewed his biography and available writings, he is a big Nobel fan. He wrote a book on the Nobel sperm bank. He has an axe to grind.

    You want to take your polemic full of loaded language and trigger words and use it to prove something? That's like voting based on a last minute political commercial. Full of facts sure, but the intent is not to educate with facts, the attempt is not to sway the intellect, but something else. This article is pure enraged reactionary claptrap with a few "facts" buried in it. So please, go torture someone else on the rack with it Grand Inquisitor.

    Burn

  • Inquisitor
    Inquisitor

    I'm glad you agree that the left-wing "bias" is based upon facts.

    Left-wing "bias" against a right-wing agenda... I don't see what the problem is, really.

    Grand INQ

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit