Re: ...Science Reinvents God... by Stuart Kauffman
  Home FAQ Contact Sign in
alt.philosophy only
 
Advanced search
POPULAR GROUPS

more...

 Up
Re: ...Science Reinvents God... by Stuart Kauffman         

Group: alt.philosophy · Group Profile
Author: BradGuth
Date: Sep 17, 2008 06:59

On Sep 10, 8:12 pm, "jonathan" write.instead.net> wrote:
> God as the Emergent Process of Creation.
>
> A pioneer of complexity science, Stuart A. Kauffman, M.D., is
> Chief Scientific Officer and Chairman of the Board, Bios Group Inc.
> Since 1985, he has served as a consultant to Los Alamos National
> Laboratory, and from 1986 to 1998 as Professor at the Santa Fe
> Institute. Major areas of research include Developmental Genetics,
> Theoretical Biology, Evolution, and the Origin of Life. He was
> awarded the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Fellowship
> and The Herbert A. Simon Award.
>
> Beyond Reductionism: Reinventing the Sacred
>
> Stuart Kauffman
>
> Abstract
>
> "We have lived under the hegemony of the reductionistic scientific worldview
> since Galileo, Newton, and Laplace. In this view, the universe is meaningless,
> as Stephen Weinberg famously said, and organisms and a court of law are "nothing
> but" particles in morion. This scientific view is inadequate. Physicists are
> beginning to abandon reductionism in favor of emergence. Emergence, both
> epistemological and ontological, embraces the emergence of life and of agency.
> With agency comes meaning, value, and doing, beyond mere happenings. More
> organisms are conscious. None of this violates any laws of physics, but it
> cannot be reduced to physics. Emergence is real, and the tiger chasing the
> gazelle are real parts of the real universe.
>
> We live, therefore, in an emergent universe. This emergence often is entirely
> unpredictable beforehand, from the evolution of novel functionalities in
> organisms to the evolution of the economy and human history. We are surrounded
> on all sides by a creativity that cannot even be prestated. Thus we have the
> first glimmerings of a new scientific worldview, beyond reductionism. In our
> universe emergence is real, and there is ceaseless, stunning creativity that has
> given rise to our biosphere, our humanity, and our history. We are partial
> co-creators of this emergent creativity.
>
> It is our choice whether we use the God word. I believe it is wise to do so. God
> can be our shared name for the true creativity in the natural universe. Such a
> view invites a new sense of the sacred, as those aspects of the creativity in
> the universe that we deem worthy of holding sacred. We are not logically forced
> to this view. Yet a global civilization, hopefully persistently diverse and
> creative, is emerging. I believe we need a shared view of God, a fully natural
> God, to orient our lives. We need a shared view of the sacred that is open to
> slow evolution, because rigidity in our view of the sacred violates how our most
> precious values evolve and invites ethical hegemony. We need a shared global
> ethic beyond our materialism. I believe a sense of God as the natural, awesome
> creativity in the universe can help us construct the sacred and a global ethic
> to help shape the global civilization toward what we choose with the best of our
> limited wisdom."
>
> http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/kauffman06/kauffman06_index.html
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> limited wisdom.

A global domination religion can not hardly function without a global
domination government as partners in crimes against humanity. They
pretty much go hand in hand.

It is well enough mainstream accepted that there has been a good God
and a bad God, as having emerged if you like. The well educated and
otherwise technologically informed Cathars of their era were among the
few trying their best intentions at sharing their expertise and for
keeping the rest of us in tune or focused upon what a good God would
have liked of us humans to strive for.

Obviously the Roman Catholic bad God knew how to kick serious butt,
and their Pope (aka commander and chief faith-based moron of that era)
did just that, setting up an example that clearly impressed Hitler,
and not otherwise having gone unnoticed by his white skinned Zionist
puppet masters as having a global domination plan of their very own.

Hitler and of his physics and science savvy company of Zionist goons
plus countless servitude minions treated those of their internment/
concentration camps better off than rabbi Saul and Deco has treated
far too many within Usenet/newsgroups, and yet folks like Stuart
Kauffman and yourself so often keep entertaining our resident
republican Godfather perverts as though they are even slightly human.

One thing for certain, your Eden should have no accommodations for the
pretend-Atheist likes of rabbi Saul or Deco unless given preferential
status by way of yourself. Question of the day is; Do you really want
the likes of Saul, Deco and other pretend-Atheists as intellectual
predatory perverts in your Eden?

I’m not suggesting that all the bad and ugly aspects of terrestrial
life can be so easily excluded from Eden, but of the well known
predators and their gang or faith-based swarm of killer bee like
mindset can be fairly easily excluded, unless that is not your
intentions.

~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG
8 Comments
diggit! del.icio.us! reddit!