The End of Faith? Science and Theology as Process

A spate of recent books would claim that science’s only role vis a vis theology is to discredit it. Sam Harris, in The End of Faith, credits religious faith as the source of much of the violence in today’s world. Richard Dawkins, in The God Delusion, views religion as, at best, a profound misunderstanding, and at worst a form of madness. Both find an antidote to such irrationality in science. To Harris and Dawkins religion is a body of accumulated knowledge. However, religion can also be thought of as a process, one based on experience, questions, and results. One group that has systematized such a process is the Society of Friends, or Quakers. The Quaker tradition shows that it is quite possible for religion to rest on experience and questioning, and for these to form the basis for an active and involved faith, one that need never reject science and its findings, but will temper their use with the best wisdom that can be gained from personal and communal experience

Your Cell Will Teach You Everything : Old Wisdom, Modern Science, and the Art of Attention

Here is a brief excerpt of the content: A brother came to Scetis to visit Abba Moses and asked him Father, give me a word. The old man said to him Go, sit in your cell, and your cell will teach you everything. 1 Among the Desert Fathers, Christian monks of the fourth and fifth centuries, it was customary for a novice to go to an elder and ask for a word, a word of advice, of counsel, a word to take home and reflect on. What does this word of advice say to us today? A Multitasking World Your cell will teach you everything. To my students, this seems like very strange advice indeed. Your cell? When I quoted Abba Moses to a colleague he instinctively reached for his phone. But a monk\u27s cell? Isn\u27t a monk\u27s cell empty, isolated? What can that cell possibly have to teach? And how? The lives of the young men and women I teach are the very antithesis of sitting in a cell. Their attention is fragmented, divided by an array of modern technologies. I watch them walk by my office window, iPod plugged into the ears, cell phone or Blackberry in hand as they check e-mail or send a text message. Time in their rooms is characterized by one eye on the television and another on the computer, on which are open their theology paper, an instant messaging box or two connecting them to friends, their Facebook page, in case one of their friends should post a status update, and perhaps a Twitter feed or their favorite blog. They assure me that they have grown up multitasking. Young Americans spend an average of six hours a day using nonprint media, and at least a quarter of that time they are using more than one screen, device, or channel.2 They are connected, linked in, logged on. It is not just the student who multitasks while doing homework. The average office worker is interrupted roughly every three minutes during the workday, interruptions that the worker herself often initiates.3 These include the phone, e-mail, [End Page 83] checking websites. As more jobs move to the knowledge and service sectors, more of us find the temptation to multitask at work irresistible. But what effect does all this multitasking have on the person? We\u27re not getting more done, for one thing. Several recent studies have shown that, contrary to self-perception, people really can\u27t multitask. The brain cannot concentrate on several things simultaneously. Instead it switches focus from task to task the same way a computer does. This means that all tasks are slowed down somewhat by the switching process, and the attempt to coordinate too many tasks can lead to more time being devoted to the switching than to the tasks at hand, a phenomenon computer scientists have long been aware of, known as thrashing. Earl Miller, a neuroscientist at MIT, notes: Think about writing an e-mail and talking on the phone at the same time. You cannot focus on one while doing the other. That\u27s because of interference between the two tasks. 4 Miller notes that in an MRI you can actually see the brain struggling as it shifts rapidly from one to the other. One can see that this might have a deleterious effect on one\u27s work life. Research shows that, once interrupted by an e-mail or a phone call, the average worker can take up to half an hour to return to full concentration on the task at hand.5 But why does this matter for the spiritual life? Over time, multitasking erodes our ability to pay focused, close attention, and this eventually eats away at traits such as patience, tenacity, judgment, and problem solving. This is most evident in the latter. In a test of fifteen-year-olds, the United States ranks twenty-fourth out of the twenty-nine developed countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development on problem solving skills, with nearly 60 percent of them scoring below the most basic level of using a single..

A new member of the family? The continuum of being, artificial intelligence, and the image of God

Are the scientific and religious definitions of life irreconcilable or do they overlap in significant areas? What is life? Religion seems to imply that there is a qualitative distinction between human beings and the rest of creation; however, there is a strong tradition in Christianity and in Eastern thought that suggests that the natural world also has a relationship with God. Human dominion over other parts of creation exists, but does not obviate this connection, nor give humans a circle unto themselves. The concept of humans being created in the image of God can be used to explain why we might believe humans are in a circle unto themselves, yet we can expand this concept to include artificially intelligent computers, a new potential member of the cognitive family. Our quest for artificial intelligence tells us both what we value in our humanity, and how we might extend that valuation to the rest of creation