Assignment #3

Assignment #3
By: Ambra Bourne • January 31, 2007

Post 1: “Reaction piece to the expert lecture”

FREEMAN DYSON

Freeman Dyson is a mathematician, prominent for his work in quantum mechanics and search for extraterrestrial existence. Dyson wrote several books, one being about the question is life could survive indefinitely. Dyson started to study mathematics then later applied mathematics to work in quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics, as explained by Dyson is precise and clear in the language it is made for, mathematics, and is not capable of being explained with words. Unlike many of the other speakers that I have heard from recently that professed to true atheism, Dyson confesses to be agnostic. An agnostic does not deny the existence of God, but believes that one cannot know for certain whether or not he exists. Because science cannot explain the existence of the universe and things that happen in it, Dyson does feel that there is reasoning behind it and that God means something, yet is still skeptical about the concept of God.

God, in his terms, has gone to a scale beyond his realm and understanding and leaves it at that. Dyson believes that life does not make sense unless you believe in a purpose. He believes that science is a skill of trade much like Richard Feynman believes that you do, it is not connected to deep thoughts, and is done for fun. Dyson believed that life is able to be spread from one planet to another, and that religion and science are compatible, they are just two different windows that are intended for different viewing purposes. Dyson suggested the use of, heat radiation to view the sky in addition to regular telescopes to search for aliens. This shell or sphere was to be used as a system of orbiting solar power satellites to completely encompass a star and capture its entire energy output. Dyson believed that this sphere would uncover the enduring survival of new life forms, and projected that evidence of the existence of such structures might lead to the discovery of intelligent extraterrestrial life.

Post 2: “Substantial questions or elaborations or rebuttals to the required reading”

The reading of Why I Am Not a Christian caught my attention. There has been a great deal of religion and faith in the readings and lectures, so it did not necessarily shock me when I read the article. The article goes on to explain how the term Christian is not properly defined and is being used too loosely in today’s age. It touches on how religion is based upon fear.

From this and the other readings, Religion is made to seem like a dense subject matter, specified for unintelligent people who make it a practice to follow with no questions asked to "blind faith. It is said that most the people that follow faith go off of general interpretations of the bible that are commonly misinterpreted. I do understand the reasoning in logic that the speakers and writers are coming from, it has only made me wonder as well about the connection to faith, religion and science.


Post 3: “Discuss issues or ideas raised in the critical thinking films”

THE SECRET OF FAQIR , NICHOLAS OF CUSA &CONFERENCE PRESENTATION Section 5

This weeks films were very different, like the others. I feel that the secret of Faqir was interesting, to me it seemed like the film was trying to focus more on the center piece of religion and reject, or to take away all of the other influences that come to play in religion, like symbols and worship objects. It was a change in preaching, or studying of religion.

The Conference presentation also dealt a lot with religion and the battle between religion and science. Religion is a system of thought that is considered to be sacred, it is a way of life. Many of the speakers have felt that it is a way of life that most people with faith are living that is foolish. Paul Davies, a physicist believes thatr the universe moves to a designed form with a higher being or machine, he feels that doing science means to figure out what is wrong with the world. Davies states that scientists assume that many things are acts of faith, such as the sun rising everyday, we do not know how it does it, but we assume, on faith that it will continue to rise. He states that the laws of physics cannot explain science, yet our minds have inherited evolutionary status and is able to solve certain problems.

Steven Nadler talks about religion & morality and the myth of Spinoza. Nadler feels that the bible is not truly the words of God. Patricia Churchland, a professor of philosophy at UCSD spoke of Nero philosophy. Churchland spoke of how we get to a moral point of view and that the view of morality being handled by religion is not correct in thinking. She feels that evolution sets the style and that experience in a culture will shape the style into specific habits and preferences. What we care about acts as a framework for what we value.