POPULARITY
2 episodes with Stephen J Gould
2 episodes with Stephen J Gould
Today we're reviewing Lisa the Skeptic, a classic episode of The Simpsons in which Lisa discovers an apparent angel skeleton at an archaeological dig. In this episode we dig into hoaxes, the use of AI in academic writing, and the work of Stephen J. Gould. But in a larger sense, this episode will settle the age-old question of Science vs. Religion (spoiler alert: Capitalism wins). Visit our new website! https://screensofthestoneage.com Get in touch with us: Bluesky: @sotsapodcast.bsky.social Facebook: @SotSAPodcast Letterboxd: https://letterboxd.com/sotsa/ Email: screensofthestoneage@gmail.com In this episode: The Burgess Shale: https://www.burgess-shale.bc.ca/ Stephen J. Gould: https://achievement.org/achiever/stephen-jay-gould/ The Cardiff Giant: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardiff_Giant AI in academic writing: https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/generative-ai-in-academic-writing/ Operation Flagship: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cnd0p192kn2o Operation Flagship on Stuff You Should Know: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYcGopqLvEs The Prophecy (1995): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7PSZ7NDEgU Kenneth Copeland is evil: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20y2Alkbc30 Christian Science reading rooms: https://apnews.com/article/christian-science-reading-rooms-religion-65a68fb88b7db958aa1c939e0d69719d Anomalocaris: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anomalocaris Billy Beer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Beer
In Episode 1 of the “Unpacking Darwinian Evolution” podcast series, former evolutionist turned Christian Michael Lane lays out foundational arguments he formerly believed related to the evolution theory. Along the way, Michael examines quotes from three leading figures who also considered the validity of transitional fossils, from late evolutionary biologist Dr. Stephen J. Gould, former director of The Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago Dr. David Raup, and famous paleontologist and evolutionist of the London Museum of Natural History Dr. Colin Patterson. Join Michael in the E4F studio and unpack the theory of evolution to build up your defense of the living Creator.Reference this lesson and find out more here: https://evidence4faith.org/portfolio/unpacking-darwinian-evolution/CREDITS: Developed & Hosted by Michael Lane. Produced & Edited by Julia Shoppach. Graphics & Publication by Julia Shoppach. Stock Music provided by mv_production, & lynnepublishing / Pond5.------------------------------------Evidence 4 Faith (E4F) is a nonprofit Christian ministry based in Wisconsin, United States, led by biologist, author, and Bible teacher Michael Lane. E4F is on mission to move people from shallow convictions and unbelief to deep faith in God through the study of history, science, the Bible, and logic.
Show Notes: Aran Shetterly, a self-professed late bloomer, took a year off in the middle of his studies to pursue an Echoing Green fellowship, which allowed him to set up a nonprofit in Costa Rica to link volunteers to environmental organizations there. He then decided to pursue a master's in American and New England studies from the University of Southern Maine. However, after completing his masters, he realized he needed to explore the world in a different way. He moved to New York and worked as an editorial assistant. A year later, he met an old school friend who founded an internet startup called Comet Systems. Aran recounts his experiences in the world of internet ethics and the impact of internet spyware on the US. He recalls when he was on his way to a meeting with Yahoo to discuss a partnership when he learned that Comet Systems was accused of creating spyware. At Yahoo he was given a lecture on internet ethics. Researching Castro's Rebellion and The Fight Against It Aran talks about a trip to Cuba where he learns about Fidel Castro's rebellion and the support of internationals during the Spanish Civil War. He met William Morgan, who was a key figure in the fight against Castro. This meeting inspired Aran to leave Comet Systems and start writing his book. Upon returning from the trip, Aran searched for information about Morgan and sent a Freedom of Information Act request to the CIA. He receives two inches of redacted documents, which he uses to write his first book, "The Americano Fighting with Castro for Cuba's Freedom." Aran summarizes the story and how Morgan played a double agent role in uncovering a plot to topple Castro, but later turned against the revolution as it turned communist. Aran recounts his six-month stay in Cuba, where he worked on two projects: setting up an exchange of artists between Maine and Cuba, and conducting research on the Kennedy assassination. He was often followed by officials from the interior ministry and almost ended up in jail. He also spent time in Miami researching the revolutionaries who were excluded from Castro's rebellion. He spent time researching the Kennedy assassination investigation. From Mexico to the Greensboro Massacre Aran and his wife Margo met while working at Comet Systems. They fell in love and decided to launch an English language magazine and website called Inside Mexico, which they launched in Mexico City in 2005. He talks about journalists they worked with and stories they covered, and how the magazine finally came to an end. After ten years in Mexico, they were drawn back to the U.S. when Margo's book proposal was optioned by a production company. The book was a success, and the couple had to come back to help promote it. In 2015, he met Reverend Nelson Johnson and Joyce Johnson, who told the story of the Greensboro massacre, a civil rights activist and Black Power leader who were trying to organize textile mills in North Carolina. The Greensboro massacre occurred when Neo Nazis and Klansmen shot and killed five and injured 10 workers during a march to educate workers about the divisive nature of the Ku Klux Klan. Morningside - An FBI Investigation and a Hole in the Story Aran's latest book, Morningside, is about the Greensboro shooting investigation, which he gained access to through interviews with FBI agent Cecil Moses. Moses provided valuable insights into the FBI's perspective and the importance of the Greensboro investigation in reclaiming some esteem in American society. The book also explores the truth and reconciliation process, which was the first place in the United States to bring the South African model to work out the events surrounding the shooting. Aran found that there was a misunderstanding about the history that still keeps people in Greensboro divided. He discovered that the narratives set about who's to blame for the shooting were deeply entrenched within the social community and the extent to which access to one's tribe depends on adhering to a certain narrative. This information was extremely informative and showed how difficult some divides are and how entrenched they are. Aran believes that much work needs to be done to work out these hermetic narratives that keep people on different sides of important historical moments. He believes that the book will help readers understand the complex and interconnected nature of the Greensboro shooting and the ongoing struggle to reconcile different perspectives on important historical moments. Harvard Professors and Courses of Influence Aran discusses his experiences at Harvard and how his fellow students and friends were hugely influential. He highlights three standout professors who made interdisciplinary connections in his work, which appealed to his sensibility: Stephen J. Gould, Philip Fisher in the English Department, and Bradley Epps in the Romance Language Department. Timestamps: 02:01: Transition to Academia and Publishing 05:05: Challenges with Comet Systems and Cuban Art 11:08: Researching and Writing "The Americano" 16:03: Life in Mexico and Launching Inside Mexico 26:36: Return to the U.S. and "Morningside" 42:36: Reflections on Harvard and Future Plans Links: Website: aranshetterly.com Event calendar: https://www.aranshetterly.com/events/ Featured Non-profit: The featured non-profit of this episode is Children's Flight of Hope recommended by Angelo Milazzo who reports: “Hi. This is Angelo Milazzo, proud member of the class of 1992 the featured nonprofit of this episode of The 92 report is children's flight of hope. Children's flight of hope is a nonprofit organization based here in sunny North Carolina, which has a mission of providing flights for essential, specialized life changing and life saving medical care for children in need, these flights are amazing in that they bring children who otherwise might not be able to travel to centers of excellence around the United States, where they can receive innovative, cutting edge and in some cases, miraculous care. These flights are provided to children and their families at no cost, which goes a huge way toward easing the emotional and financial burden on families. I had the privilege of serving on the board of children's flight of hope many years ago, I served for several years following the organization's inauguration. In the late 90s, the organization has grown and has evolved to the point where it is now partnering with major air carriers to provide this life saving transportation for pediatric patients. You can learn more about the work of children's flight of hope at their website, which is children's flight of hope.org, and children's flight of hope is all spelled out together as one word. And now I leave you with Will Bachman with this week's episode.” To learn more about their work visit: https://www.childrensflightofhope.org/
This is a crossover episode in which https://x.com/loubohan interviews me for his podcast Deus Ex Machina.I was obviously in an exuberant mood for this interview - it's one of my favorites!Deus Ex Machina podcast:https://open.spotify.com/episode/7mXUfNJdNnOjGfu6VGactr?si=Y3j1OZG4QsGdPhXd8dKsrw…Timestamps:(00:00) - Growing up in Iowa. Athletics, Chinese culture. KMT and military family background. (11:48) - Hearing about the Cultural Revolution from my dad: his family experienced it firsthand in Zhejiang. Meanwhile, US experts and academics were entirely deluded about reality in PRC (20:55) - "Experts" are often miscalibrated (35:03) - Physicists and finance. Was Charlie Munger right to say it's a waste of talent to channel top brains into finance? (45:15) - Hedgehogs, Foxes, and Eagles. Polymathy. (48:41) - Development of modern China as the greatest story of the last 50 years. My first visit to China: the Shenzhen Special Economic Zone in 1992. US-China competition and the future of Asian Americans. (56:52) - Genomic Prediction. Genomics of cognitive ability. Leftists holding back genetic science. PING = NIH-funded Pediatric Imagining, Neurocognition, and Genetics study. Stephen J. Gould was a fraud. Asian culture (pragmatic realism) and resistance to woken... (01:05:20) - Physics and Free Will. Meat machines programmed by evolution to have an illusion of self? (01:10:04) - Copenhagen Interpretation of QM: Is there true randomness in Physics? Many Worlds, Foundations of QM, and groupthink in modern physics. (01:19:09) - Christianity, raised as a Methodist by my mother, whose family has been Christian since the 19th century. Religious Experience vs Physics viewpoint. Meat machines programmed by evolution to have mystical religious feelings? (01:21:28) - Raising children, family, happiness, the meaning of life in view of my father's life (01:24:34) - The meaning of life, "All is Vanity" (Ecclesiastes), Religion Music used with permission from Blade Runner Blues Livestream improvisation by State Azure.–Steve Hsu is Professor of Theoretical Physics and of Computational Mathematics, Science, and Engineering at Michigan State University. Previously, he was Senior Vice President for Research and Innovation at MSU and Director of the Institute of Theoretical Science at the University of Oregon. Hsu is a startup founder (SuperFocus.ai, SafeWeb, Genomic Prediction, Othram) and advisor to venture capital and other investment firms. He was educated at Caltech and Berkeley, was a Harvard Junior Fellow, and has held faculty positions at Yale, the University of Oregon, and MSU. Please send any questions or suggestions to manifold1podcast@gmail.com or Steve on X @hsu_steve.
In this episode, we dive into Stephen J. Gould's Rocks of Ages and explore his compelling argument for "Non-Overlapping Magisteria" — the idea that science and religion each have their own domains and don't need to clash. Join us as we unpack how Gould's perspective offers a refreshing take on the age-old conflict between fact and faith, and what it means for our understanding of both. You can get a copy of Rocks of Ages from these online booksellers https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/70014/rocks-of-ages-by-stephen-jay-gould/ https://bookshop.org/p/books/rocks-of-ages-science-and-religion-in-the-fullness-of-life-stephen-jay-gould/9062359?ean=9780345450401 Check out Justin's links and follow him https://www.justinclark.org/ https://www.instagram.com/justinclarkph/ https://www.tiktok.com/@justinclarkph https://bsky.app/profile/justinclarkph.bsky.social https://www.threads.net/@justinclarkph https://www.in.gov/history/ https://blog.history.in.gov/ https://newspapers.library.in.gov/ And check out my linktree https://linktr.ee/Skepticalleftist
In this episode I will be talking more about how to debate Creationists. I have taken this topic on in the past, in my original episode on how to debate Creationists, and I have also interviewed well known evolutionary scientist Dr. Niles Eldredge who was one of the founders of the Punctuated Equilibrium theory of evolution alongside Stephen J. Gould. Today I will be interviewing someone who I saw debating Kent Hovind a leading Young Earth Creationist. The debate was not what one comes to expect from these affairs and was more like a courtroom interrogation than the usual grandstanding and Gish Galloping that one might expect from a Creationist debate. Let's see if we can all learn something. Mr. Anderson is a practicing Canadian lawyer who focuses on litigation. Having spent years in and out of the courtroom cross-examining witnesses and analyzing arguments, he has recently turned his talents on proponents of pseudoscience and dogmatic thinking on the internet. He is most well known for his attacks on creationists such as Kent Hovind, and has recently started a YouTube channel where he breaks down the techniques he uses to force evasive and pugnacious individuals to come to grips with facts and arguments that they would prefer to ignore. His style, for those of you who have never seen his videos, is very reminiscent of a cross examination, so his debates look very different from what you are likely used to seeing online, and he joins us here today. Support the podcast at patron.podbean.com/TheRationalView Join the Facebook discussion @TheRationalView Twix @AlScottRational Insta @The_Rational_View
Dr. Jonathan Losos is a Professor of Biology at Washington University in St. Louis. He is one of the leading figures in the field of evolutionary biology. He has specifically studied anole lizards, the adaptations to various islands, and has made groundbreaking findings in the area of convergent radiation. We mention David Resnick, Lee Dugatkin, Stephen J Gould, Charles Darwin, Simon Conway Morris, and many more. His book "Improbably Destinies" : https://www.amazon.com/Improbable-Destinies-Chance-Future-Evolution/dp/0399184929 His book "The cat's meow" : https://www.amazon.com/Cats-Meow-Evolved-Savanna-Your/dp/1984878700
*Killing the Messenger: But not the message! Hear how Dr. Baugh and the Paluxy footprints have survived the slings and arrows of worldly fortune to remain in the battle at the Creation Evidence Museum of Texas in Glen Rose. *Death of an Atheist: Dr. Baugh talks about his ministry opportunity with former atheist Stephen J. Gould & current atheist Richard Dawkins in Glen Rose, (he was too busy, but his 17 year old assistant got it done), and his open invitation to Lawrence Krauss and Neil "Inhale" deGrasse Tyson. (as long as they behave themselves). *Global Witness: The global limestone layer is a witness to the global flood of Noah's day. *Glen Kuban Footprint Iconoclast: Dr. Baugh doesn't name names, but here at RSR we know Glen Kuban as the Footprint Iconoclast! *Collagen Found in Dinosaur Bones: Despite efforts to discredit the suggestion of a young age for dinosaurs implied by the human footprints found with them at Paluxy, skeptics will not overcome Mary Schweitzer's discoveries & the irrefutable evidence of Dinosaur Collagen.
*Killing the Messenger: But not the message! Hear how Dr. Baugh and the Paluxy footprints have survived the slings and arrows of worldly fortune to remain in the battle at the Creation Evidence Museum of Texas in Glen Rose. *Death of an Atheist: Dr. Baugh talks about his ministry opportunity with former atheist Stephen J. Gould & current atheist Richard Dawkins in Glen Rose, (he was too busy, but his 17 year old assistant got it done), and his open invitation to Lawrence Krauss and Neil "Inhale" deGrasse Tyson. (as long as they behave themselves). *Global Witness: The global limestone layer is a witness to the global flood of Noah's day. *Glen Kuban Footprint Iconoclast: Dr. Baugh doesn't name names, but here at RSR we know Glen Kuban as the Footprint Iconoclast! *Collagen Found in Dinosaur Bones: Despite efforts to discredit the suggestion of a young age for dinosaurs implied by the human footprints found with them at Paluxy, skeptics will not overcome Mary Schweitzer's discoveries & the irrefutable evidence of Dinosaur Collagen.
Darwin's original tenants of his theory as laid out in his 1859 seminal work, "The Origin of Species," were these: that all organisms evolved from a common ancestor via minor, undirected changes, and that natural selection determines which of those random mutations get passed down to future progeny. Variations that confer a survival advantage allow the creature who inherits it to live long enough to procreate, and pass down that change to the next generation. Darwin successfully demonstrated "microevolution" with his Galapagos finch study, showing that finches confined to a particular island would evolve differently shaped beaks over time, in accordance with their available food sources. Similar processes have been demonstrated within many other species as well, and few would dispute that such microevolution does, in fact, occur. But Darwin then extrapolated this process, assuming that over the eons, such tiny changes could allow one species to evolve into another. Leaving aside the philosophical objections we've already covered in previous episodes, such as irreducible complexity and information theory negating the possibility of this occurring, is there any evidence that it nevertheless did occur? If it did, the fossil record should be riddled with examples of transitional species--some of which might have been "dead ends," but many of which should have been ancestors halfway between one species and another. Darwin himself wrote in "The Origin of Species," "Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory. The explanation lies, as I believe, in the extreme imperfection of the geological record." In other words, he figured that in time, and with acceptance of his theory and with scientists all over the globe searching for such evidence, the "missing links" would eventually be found. So, 164 years later, with belief in evolution dominating almost the entire scientific community, have any fossils of missing links been found? A quick YouTube search on evolutionary fossils presents the first arthropod, mollusk, insect, etc as "missing links." They're the "first" because of where they were found in the rock strata (where deeper is older). But all of the creatures presented are part of recognizable classes of creatures alive today, though those exact species are often extinct. This means they're the end of a line; they're not an intermediate on the way to anything we can identify. (Some of the species aren't extinct at all though, and the exact same organism is still alive today. This is what evolutionists call "stasis": no change over millions of years.) The only possible true missing link of which I'm aware is one found in the 1860s, during Darwin's own lifetime, called archaeopteryx. It was a fossil showing characteristics of both a bird and a reptile, and it is the basis of the widely supposed belief that dinosaurs are the ancestors of birds. Larry Martin, paleontologist from the University of Kansas, said in 1985 that archaeopteryx is not a true transitional species, but merely an extinct type of bird. According to wikipedia, twelve such fossils of archaeopteryx have been found, and all around the same area of Germany, encased in limestone. Since only 12 fossils of this same species were found in a very localized area, Martin's explanation makes the most sense. We should have found many more intermediates all over the world, in various stages of transition, if the hypothesis that dinosaurs were the ancestors of birds was correct. (We also wouldn't have expected the two to coexist either, if one were the ancestor of the other, but apparently according to both the Smithsonian and National Geographic, they did.) A few other possible contenders for "missing links" have been found over the years, but the case for each of them has been weak at best. One was the Java Man, found in 1891, supposed to be a missing link between humans and apes. All that was found of it was a skull, a femur, and three teeth. These were later determined to have belonged to three different species. Another was the Piltdown Ape, found in England in the early 1900s, also speculated to be a missing link between apes and humans. In Nov 1953, however, Time Magazine published collected evidence of multiple paleontologists that this ape too was comprised of fossils from three different species. The BBC later called it "the biggest hoax in British history." Peking Man was found in China in the 1920s, another supposed common link between apes and humans. All that was found of it were fragments of skull and teeth. Yet another was "Lucy," found in East Africa in 1974, another supposed common ancestor between apes and humans. Because of the structure of her knees, hands, and feet, which were not at all similar to humans, Dr Charles Oxnard wrote in his book, “Fossils, Teeth, and Sex: New Perspectives on Human Evolution” that Lucy was an extinct species of ape. It would be a decided understatement to say that the fossil evidence for evolution is underwhelming. One possible counter-argument for this is that it is exceedingly rare for an organism to become fossilized in the first place. This is because of the putrefaction of microorganisms, which consume dead organic matter. The Smithsonian Magazine writes that fossilization can occur via a few mechanisms: petrification (of bone, or wood), or from an organism being rapidly consumed by sediment that later turns to rock, tar, or amber, protecting the organic dead material from putrefying organisms. While most living things therefore do not become fossils after death, one would think, if Darwin's theory were true, that there should still be many more intermediates than there are recognizable species today. There's an even bigger problem than the lack of transitionary fossils. The rock strata defies the narrative of painstakingly slow evolutionary changes over a period of millions of years. Instead, even in Darwin's own time, he became aware of, and was troubled by, the contradictory evidence of the Cambrian Explosion, also dubbed the "Biological Big Bang." The deepest strata of rock, beneath the Cambrian, demonstrates only fossils of single celled or simple multicellular organisms. Then, suddenly, the layers of rock believed to correspond to the Cambrian period 13-25 million years ago showed nearly every phyla of animals alive today, fully formed. This is true worldwide of the strata belonging to this period. The Biological Big Bang raises several additional questions. First, what happened in the Cambrian period that allowed so many creatures to become fossilized all at once, when fossils are generally rare? In many cases the fossils found are even of soft-bodied creatures (The Qingjiang biota—A Burgess Shale-type fossil Lagerstätte from the early Cambrian of South China), which should putrefy quickly after death--preservation of these in such exquisite detail would certainly require very rapid burial. Also, land animals appear alongside marine animals in the Cambrian period all across the globe. What could have caused such intermingling of creatures that do not otherwise cohabitate? (A global flood mentioned in Genesis 6 comes to mind.) Darwin wrote in the sixth edition of "Origin of Species": "To the question why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system, I can give no satisfactory answer." Evolutionary paleontologist Stephen J Gould later said, "The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils." He went on to propose the theory of Punctuated Equilibrium, in which one species makes a large jump rather than the series of tiny changes predicted in classical evolution to explain the deficit of the fossil record, though this mechanism is philosophically even more fraught than tiny progressive changes would have been. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Our guest this week has lived with a slow growing, incurable cancer for the past two decades. She tells us about how she has modified her lifestyle using nutrition as well as a combination of distraction and mindfulness to grapple with the mental challenges of uncertainty. She talks about the idea of “median survival statistics” and how a powerful essay by Stephen J. Gould helped her see those stats in a different light. She also discusses the evolution of treatment and imaging over her 22 years as a patient, and the powerful scientific progress that has been made during that time. Key highlights: The unique nature of indolent (slow growing) cancer and living as a patient for +20 years Examining median survival stats and Stephen Gould's paper “The Median Isn't the Message” Nutrition modifications and the shift to a plant-based diet Grappling with uncertainty using Distraction + Mindfulness The evolution of treatment and imaging in her cancer over the past 21 years About our guest: Rowan Carlson is an aquatic ecologist who was diagnosed in 2001 with an incurable form of Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma that requires repeated treatment. Thanks to her doctors who carefully timed her treatments and family and friends who supported her in a myriad of different ways, she continued teaching at the college level and conducting research abroad through 2019. Now retired from teaching, she gardens episodically, hikes daily, demonstrates monthly for climate action, and habitually writes scientific papers. Key Moments: 7 minutes 50 seconds: I heard a nutritionist speaking to a group of cancer patients at a local wellness center. And I found that what she was recommending was so different from the way I ate that I thought it was radical. So I made appointments with two other nutritionists specializing in cancer patients, and all three of them were advocating the same healthful diet. They were advocating a plant-based diet avoiding red meat and processed meat and filling your plate with vegetables. 15 minutes 35 seconds: There's a very powerful essay written by a famous biologist, Stephen J. Gould, and the title of that essay is “The Median Isn't the Message.” He was prompted to write this essay because he had just been diagnosed with a very rare form of GI cancer, and he quickly dug up a medical paper and learned that the median survivorship of this cancer was 8 months. The essay describes how he dealt with this. He convinced himself that he would live longer than that, and most people do live longer than the median. He lived for another 20 years and died from a different type of cancer. 17 minutes 24 seconds: What has really helped me since that first year after my diagnosis are two things. One is distraction. I distract myself by keeping very busy on projects that are larger than myself, for instance writing scientific papers and more recently working with three climate action groups. I find this work very fulfilling, and it does distract me, but you can keep yourself too busy and that can rob you of time with family and friends, which is also important, so I try to balance distraction with something called mindfulness. Mindfulness is the idea of living in the moment, and it's been very helpful for me. Visit the Manta Cares website Disclaimer: This podcast is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute the practice of medicine, nursing or other professional health care services, including the giving of medical advice, and no doctor/patient relationship is formed. The use of information on this podcast or materials linked from this podcast is at the user's own risk. The content of this podcast is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Users should not disregard, or delay in obtaining, medical advice for any medical condition they may have, and should seek the assistance of their health care professionals for any such conditions. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/manta-cares/support
.Considering the Noma principle by Stephen J. Gould, is science how heavens go and religion tells us how to go to heaven? 3:00 Can the Rav recommend a method to learn the structure of hebrew? 6:00. How can I deal with my impulse to ask unanswerable questions? 9:30. What resources did people have in the past to communicate? 12:00 Why the Jewish people don't proselytize to become Jews? 16:00 How to deal with people that'd criticize the foundations of the Oral tradition and the Arizal's Kabbalah? 24:30. What attracted the Rav to Chasidism? What's the distinguished genius of the Chasidic Torah literature? 30:30. Did Jacob found out what his sons did to Joseph? 33:30. What's the jewish answer to the trolly problem? 39:30. What does it mean the kiss of Jacob to Rachel when he meets her? 42:30. How can I get pure motivations? 47:30. What's the purpose of the ten pronouncements? 51:00 Should Emuna pshuta should be one's motivation? Having received his Ph.D. in mathematical logic at Brandeis University, Rabbi Dr. Dovid Gottlieb went on to become Professor of Philosophy at Johns Hopkins University. Today he is a senior faculty member at Ohr Somayach in Jerusalem. An accomplished author and lecturer, Rabbi Gottlieb has electrified audiences with his stimulating and energetic presentations on ethical and philosophical issues. In Jewish Philosophy with Rabbi Dr. Gottlieb, we are invited to explore the most fascinating and elemental concepts of Jewish Philosophy. Would you like to sponsor an episode? A series? We'd love to hear from you : podcasts@ohr.edu Visit us @ https://ohr.edu ! Yeshivat Ohr Somayach located in the heart of Jerusalem, is an educational institution for young Jewish English-speaking men. We have a range of classes and programs designed for the intellectually curious and academically inclined - for those with no background in Jewish learning to those who are proficient in Gemara and other original source material. To find the perfect program for you, please visit our website https://ohr.edu/study_in_israel or call our placement specialist at 1-254-981-0133 today!
1.Considering the Noma principle by Stephen J. Gould, is science how heavens go and religion tells us how to go to heaven? 2.3. Can the Rav recommend a method to learn the structure of hebrew? 3.6. How can I deal with my impulse to ask unanswerable questions? 4.9:30. What resources had the people in the past to communicate? 5.12. Why the Jewish people don't proselytize to become Jews? 6.16. How to deal with people that'd criticize the foundations of the Oral tradition and the Arizal's Kabbalah? 7.24:30. What attracted the Rav to Chasidism? What's the distinguished genius of the Chasidic Torah literature? 8.30:30. Did Jacob found out what his sons did to Joseph? 9.33:30. What's the jewish answer to the trolly problem? 10.39:30. What does it mean the kiss of Jacob to Rachel when he meets her? 11.42:30. How can I get pure motivations? 12.47:30. What's the purpose of the ten pronouncements? 13:51. Should Emuna pshuta should be one's motivation? Yeshivat Ohr Somayach located in the heart of Jerusalem, is an educational institution for young Jewish English-speaking men. We have a range of classes and programs designed for the intellectually curious and academically inclined - for those with no background in Jewish learning to those who are proficient in Gemara and other original source material. To find the perfect program for you, please visit our website https://ohr.edu/study_in_israel or call our placement specialist at 1-254-981-0133 today!
This week, we flip the Disney story of life on it's head thanks to a barrel of seawater, a 1970s era computer, and underwater geysers. It's the chaos of life. Latif, Lulu, and our Senior Producer Matt Kielty were all sitting on their own little stories until they got thrown into the studio, and had their cherished beliefs about the shape of life put on a collision course. From an accidental study of sea creatures, to the ambitions of Stephen J Gould, to an undercooked theory that captured the world's imagination, we undo the seeming order of the living world and try to make some music out of the wreckage. (Bonus: Learn how Francis Crick really thought life got started on this planet). This episode was reported by Latif Nasser, Matt Kielty, Heather Radke, Lulu Miller and Candice Wang. It was produced by Matt Kielty and Simon Adler. Sound and music from Matt Kielty, Simon Adler, and Jeremy Bloom, and dialogue mix by Arianne Wack. Radiolab is on YouTube! Catch up with new episodes and hear classics from our archive. Plus, find other cool things we did in the past — like miniseries, music videos, short films and animations, behind-the-scenes features, Radiolab live shows, and more. Take a look, explore and subscribe! Support Radiolab by becoming a member of The Lab today.
https://thecrypto6.com https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANOM The Controversial Experiments and Wuhan Lab Suspected of Starting the Coronavirus Pandemic https://www.newsweek.com/controversial-wuhan-lab-experiments-that-may-have-started-coronavirus-pandemic-1500503 Humans, Not Animals, Likely Took the COVID Virus to Wuhan, Contrary to China's Claims https://www.newsweek.com/humans-not-animals-likely-took-covid-virus-wuhan-contrary-chinas-claims-1578861 A Proposed Origin for SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 Pandemic https://www.independentsciencenews.org/commentaries/a-proposed-origin-for-sars-cov-2-and-the-covid-19-pandemic/ Could Coronavirus Have Escaped from a Lab? https://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/2020/09/09/alina-chan-broad-institute-coronavirus/ Why the COVID lab-leak theory in Wuhan shouldn't be dismissed https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/opinion/2021/03/22/why-covid-lab-leak-theory-wuhan-shouldnt-dismissed-column/4765985001/ Did COVID-19 Escape From a Lab? A Coronavirus Investigation https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/coronavirus-lab-escape-theory.html A Troubling Tome by Greg Laden https://www.americanscientist.org/article/a-troubling-tome T: The Story of Testosterone, the Hormone that Dominates and Divides Us, by Carole Hooven https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250236067 http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/racism.html Dave Rubin interview with Stefan Molyneux on Controversies (Pt. 2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0KKc6GbeNo Race - The Power of an Illusion . Background Readings - Interview with Stephen J. Gould https://www.pbs.org/race/000_About/002_04-background-01-09.htm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivermectin#COVID-19 Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis to Inform Clinical Guidelines https://journals.lww.com/americantherapeutics/Abstract/9000/Ivermectin_for_Prevention_and_Treatment_of.98040.aspx Who is Declaring What's Legitimate Information vs. Misinformation on Wikipedia? https://trialsitenews.com/who-is-declaring-whats-legitimate-information-vs-misinformation-on-wikipedia/ "It is our strong belief that The PRINCIPLE Trial is a non-essential, poorly designed study" https://twitter.com/BIRDGroupUK/status/1410663769198432258/photo/2 New research suggests ivermectin works https://www.hartgroup.org/ivermectin-works/ Steve Kirsch On COVID Early Treatment and Censorship https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHIYXqMXZOU https://c19ivermectin.com https://ivmmeta.com https://covid19criticalcare.com/covid-19-protocols/i-mask-plus-protocol/ https://covid19criticalcare.com/covid-19-protocols/i-mass-protocol/ https://covid19criticalcare.com/covid-19-protocols/i-recover-protocol/ https://covid19criticalcare.com/ivermectin-in-covid-19/how-to-get-ivermectin/ bumper music Franz Liszt - La Campanella Etude No.3 in G sharp minor S.141, Grandes études de Paganini https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBwEXRz3A40
Einstein's Dreams is a fictional collage of stories dreamed by Albert Einstein in 1905, when he worked in a patent office in Switzerland. As the defiant but sensitive young genius is creating his theory of relativity, a new conception of time, he imagines many possible worlds. In one, time is circular, and people are fated to repeat their triumphs and failures over and over. In another, there is a place where time stands still, visited by lovers and parents clinging to their children. In another, time is a nightingale, sometimes trapped by a bell jar. Support our Sponsors LinkedIn Jobs! Use this link to post your first job ad for FREE LinkedIn.com/impossible https://magbreakthrough.com/impossible Probable Impossibilities is a brilliant collection of meditative essays on the possibilities - and impossibilities - of nothingness and infinity, and how our place in the cosmos falls somewhere in between. Can space be divided into smaller and smaller units, ad infinitum? Does space extend to larger and larger regions, on and on to infinity? Is consciousness reducible to the material brain and its neurons? What was the origin of life, and can biologists create life from scratch in the lab? Probable Impossibilities is a deeply engaged consideration of what we know of the universe, of life and the mind, and of things vastly larger and smaller than ourselves. 00:00:00 Intro 00:02:03 What's the status of your movie adaptation? 00:03:15 What about planck time is so interesting to you? 00:09:28 How do you reconcile the fact that great minds often go with bad people? 00:11:46 The Role of Ego in your current book Probable Impossibilities, and the story of Andrei Linde. 00:15:11 What do you think about the proliferation of "god" in cosmology and physics literature? 00:16:24 What are you views regarding aetheism and agnosticism? 00:25:12 Does science rely too much on Carl Popper's assertions about falsifiability? 00:32:26 Do you agree with Stephen J. Gould? Are religion and science separate but equal, and the obligation of communicating science to the public. 00:33:24 Should we be encouraging young people to be science communicators? 00:36:25 How did you come to write Einstein's Dream? 00:42:56 Which scenario of time do you personally favor? 00:47:53 Final Thrilling Three. Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmXH_moPhfkqCk6S3b9RWuw/join Support the podcast: https://www.patreon.com/drbriankeating And please join my mailing list to get resources and enter giveaways to win a FREE copy of my book (and more) http://briankeating.com/mailing_list.php
Mental Models Podcast It's not a brain in a jar, that's the gist!
Global economy has stalled in early 2020 due to COVID-19 and governments have provided stimuli. The stock market has rallied; SMP is up from the bottom which is the most dramatic rise of the market EVER! CONCERN: exuberance in the market does not take into account the return to normal, as there is a new normal, which is still unknown. Narratives fill the gaps of unknown reality, and the narratives are less reliable than ever before, since analogies are made in the context of experience. Many business will be gone, or have take on significant indebtedness. Largely what has driven the stock market to rally is corporations borrowing at low interest rates, then buying more expensive equity. TWO trillion $ of equity expansion! “Punctuated Equilibrium” by Stephen J. Gould explain the evolution of ecological system of the stock market and the global business system. In the current business world the environmental shifts in business have created a ‘disequilibrium’ due to breaks in business and lifestyle. This alteration in business ecological system is looking for ‘Equilibrium’, which is not likely to occur very soon, and possibly not without a vaccine for COVID-19! Stay safe and healthy out there! For more on best investing strategies, avoiding bias and learning about your brain BUY 5 star reviewed “Understanding Behavioral Bia$” on Amazon - link here: http://amzn.to/2XHtsOE Links: Robinhood to track individual investors on individual stocks. https://robinhood.com/us/en/ Punctuated Equilibrium by Stephen J. Gould. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674024441 Peppered moth of UK. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-36424768 Have you heard ‘Mental Models: Reflexivity: #20’ by Mental Models Podcast | Behavioral Finance https://soundcloud.com/user-682136294/mental-models-reflexivity-20
What is consciousness? Where does the mind reside? Can we create artificial intelligence that can fake intelligence, or maybe just have it? What happened in 17th century Europe that led to such a fascinating time for deep thinkers? And are we going through a similar period of churn today? Ben has a fascinating and wide-ranging chat about these big questions with University of Alberta professor of philosophy Amy Schmitter. About the Guest Besides her position as Professor of Philosophy, Amy is an Executive Editor and Board Secretary for the Canadian Journal of Philosophy.She is also involved in the project “New Narratives in the History of Philosophy,” supported by a Partnership Development Grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. In April 2016, she was a Visiting Professor in the Facultad de Filosof Pontificia Universidad Javeriana in Bogota, where she lectured and held several seminar sessions. Before coming to the University of Alberta, Amy taught at the University of Pittsburgh, Hamilton College in New York, and the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque. She has also been a Visiting Scholar at the University of California at Berkeley and at New York University, and during 2002-03, held a Fellowship at the Stanford Humanities Center, Stanford University. She has received several awards for Summer Institutes and Seminars from the National Endowment for the Humanities (U.S.A.) and two Standard Research Grants from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. She also serves on various committees, including the Religious Studies Advisory Council for the U of A, the Program Committee for the Pacific Northwest-Western Canada Seminar in Early Modern Philosophy, and review committees for several grant organizations. Amy's main areas of research and writing are the history of early modern philosophy and philosophy of art. But those are broad and eclectic areas that (necessarily) take her into many different topics, historical periods and approaches to philosophy. Her teaching interests and educational history cover yet further fields. The result is that she knows a little bit about many different things. Mentioned in this Episode Here are the thinkers we mentioned in this episode: Hume, Plato, Aristotle, Hegel, Russell, Marx, Descartes, Hobbes, Leibniz, Spinoza, and Poulain de la Barre. Check them out! A History of Western Philosophy, a book by philosopher Bertrand Russell Crash Course on Aesthetic Appreciation, a video that mentions the example of a chained cat statue (is the chain part of the art?) The Panda's Thumb: More Reflections in Natural History, a book by Stephen J. Gould The Cave and the Light: Plato Versus Aristotle and the Struggles for the Soul of Western Civilization, a book by Arthur Herman Discourse on Method, a 1637 work of philosophy by René Descartes Physics, a 4th century BC work of philosophy by Aristotle The Quote of the Week "One cannot conceive anything so strange and so implausible that it has not already been said by one philosopher or another." - René Descartes
The biologist Stephen J. Gould proposed a solution to the apparent friction between religion and science: rather than being in outright conflict, science and religion each preside over distinct, non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA). Science can tell us nothing of the supernatural, and religion can only give us values, meaning, morality, and purpose. We discuss the utter … Continue reading CA49 Science vs. the Supernatural: the Failure of NOMA and the Triumph of Naturalism →
The Learning Leader Show With Ryan Hawk Episode #282: Seth Godin - You Can't Be Seen Until You Learn To See "In a crowded marketplace, fitting in is a failure. In a busy marketplace, not standing out is the same as being invisible." Show Notes: Commonalities of sustaining excellence: It changes over time Must be willing to fail - "Okay... Will I do things that might not work?" Some of Seth's failures: many teaching mistakes, tried to build philanthropy platform that failed, blog has failed at times How to handle a slump? - "There's no such thing as a long slump." Stephen J. Gould - "The real problem is how you respond to the failure. You can't tell yourself a story that's not true." Have honest self talk -- "This isn't a slump." Stanford MBA - Friends with Chip Conley. "Everyone there feels like a fraud or an arrogant jerk. I felt like I was drowning. The sessions with Chip changed my life." Chips "Random Acts of Initiative" were life changing. Chip taking initiative and not fearing rejection. Remarkable. Empathy - A mentor wants to see you do things that are bold, leap forward because of them. Be a mentor - "Make the world shinier. Bring life to more causes." Economy of words - "I made the decision to write like I talk." "Talking isn't better because you're afraid." The book publishing world and why Seth chose to traditionally publish This Is Marketing What percentage of Seth's success is luck? "98.2%" The final 1.8% is "relentless persistence." "The 98.2% is the parent lottery." How to deal with rejection after rejection... "Culture IS strategy. How we treat people. It's hard to do the things we're proud of." "Great ones have better clients." Side hustle advice -- Start it on the side so that you don't have to make money at it right away. You can choose your clients and never just "do it for the money." "Exactly. Great advice." Keys to storytelling - "We have too much stuff." Better understand the story you're telling yourself. Why joining The Learning Leader Circle is a good idea Use the "Get To Know You Document" "Luck for me is 98.2% of it. The other 1.8% is relentless persistence." Social Media: Follow Seth's writing on Twitter: @ThisIsSethsBlog Read: This Is Marketing Connect with me on LinkedIn Join our Facebook Group: The Learning Leader Community To Follow Me on Twitter: @RyanHawk12
Prior Preparation Prevents Piss Poor Performance. Harland and Ryan tackle Stephen J Gould and Richard Lewontin's paper “The Spandrels of San Marco” and discuss adaptationism's benefits and flaws in evolutionary biology. This is a topic we thought we could shoot off. Well…hard to tell…it's hard to tell if we just fucked off or if we got anywhere. Maybe we get somewhere in some places. Hopefully this is more than just listening to two people talk and making no sense (especially Ryan). Our best to all those involved who had little say in the matter other than saying anything at all. It's a lesson in how not to record a conversation intended for an audience larger than zero. Also, about two-thirds of the way through we are visited by our biggest fan who shouts over us the whole time. P.S. This is not an apology…we think…no, we're sorry.
Much of the public debate about the relationship between science and theology has been antagonistic or adversarial. Proponents on both sides argue that their respective claims are contradictory–that the claims of science trump and even discredit the claims of religion or theology. Some have sought to portray the relationship in a different light. The evolutionary biologist Stephen J. Gould famously asserted that the two realms were “nonoverlapping magisteria.” But recently theologians and scientists have begun to mark out new ground for robust conversation. Tom McLeish‘s book Faith and Wisdom in Science (Oxford University Press, 2014) takes this conversation to new heights. Locating the impulse for science in much biblical literature, particularly the wisdom books of the Hebrew Bible, he shows how one might understand science as a theological endeavor. Rather than a paradigm of “science and theology,” he posits a “theology of science,” an interrelationship that not only gives us new eyes with which to read the history of science more coherently but also yields a renewed appreciation for science as part of a “ministry of reconciliation” with the natural world and the causes of human suffering. Tom McLeish is Professor of Physics and former Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research at Durham University. He studied for his first degree and PhD in polymer physics at the University of Cambridge and in 1987 became a lecturer in physics at the University of Sheffield. In 1993 he took the chair in polymer physics at the University of Leeds. He took up his current position in Durham in 2008. He is a fellow of the Institute of Physics, the Royal Society of Chemistry, the American Physical Society, and the Royal Society. He is also involved in science communication with the public via radio, television, and school lectures, discussing topics ranging from the physics of slime to the interaction of faith and science. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Much of the public debate about the relationship between science and theology has been antagonistic or adversarial. Proponents on both sides argue that their respective claims are contradictory–that the claims of science trump and even discredit the claims of religion or theology. Some have sought to portray the relationship in a different light. The evolutionary biologist Stephen J. Gould famously asserted that the two realms were “nonoverlapping magisteria.” But recently theologians and scientists have begun to mark out new ground for robust conversation. Tom McLeish‘s book Faith and Wisdom in Science (Oxford University Press, 2014) takes this conversation to new heights. Locating the impulse for science in much biblical literature, particularly the wisdom books of the Hebrew Bible, he shows how one might understand science as a theological endeavor. Rather than a paradigm of “science and theology,” he posits a “theology of science,” an interrelationship that not only gives us new eyes with which to read the history of science more coherently but also yields a renewed appreciation for science as part of a “ministry of reconciliation” with the natural world and the causes of human suffering. Tom McLeish is Professor of Physics and former Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research at Durham University. He studied for his first degree and PhD in polymer physics at the University of Cambridge and in 1987 became a lecturer in physics at the University of Sheffield. In 1993 he took the chair in polymer physics at the University of Leeds. He took up his current position in Durham in 2008. He is a fellow of the Institute of Physics, the Royal Society of Chemistry, the American Physical Society, and the Royal Society. He is also involved in science communication with the public via radio, television, and school lectures, discussing topics ranging from the physics of slime to the interaction of faith and science.
Much of the public debate about the relationship between science and theology has been antagonistic or adversarial. Proponents on both sides argue that their respective claims are contradictory–that the claims of science trump and even discredit the claims of religion or theology. Some have sought to portray the relationship in a different light. The evolutionary biologist Stephen J. Gould famously asserted that the two realms were “nonoverlapping magisteria.” But recently theologians and scientists have begun to mark out new ground for robust conversation. Tom McLeish‘s book Faith and Wisdom in Science (Oxford University Press, 2014) takes this conversation to new heights. Locating the impulse for science in much biblical literature, particularly the wisdom books of the Hebrew Bible, he shows how one might understand science as a theological endeavor. Rather than a paradigm of “science and theology,” he posits a “theology of science,” an interrelationship that not only gives us new eyes with which to read the history of science more coherently but also yields a renewed appreciation for science as part of a “ministry of reconciliation” with the natural world and the causes of human suffering. Tom McLeish is Professor of Physics and former Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research at Durham University. He studied for his first degree and PhD in polymer physics at the University of Cambridge and in 1987 became a lecturer in physics at the University of Sheffield. In 1993 he took the chair in polymer physics at the University of Leeds. He took up his current position in Durham in 2008. He is a fellow of the Institute of Physics, the Royal Society of Chemistry, the American Physical Society, and the Royal Society. He is also involved in science communication with the public via radio, television, and school lectures, discussing topics ranging from the physics of slime to the interaction of faith and science. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Much of the public debate about the relationship between science and theology has been antagonistic or adversarial. Proponents on both sides argue that their respective claims are contradictory–that the claims of science trump and even discredit the claims of religion or theology. Some have sought to portray the relationship in a different light. The evolutionary biologist Stephen J. Gould famously asserted that the two realms were “nonoverlapping magisteria.” But recently theologians and scientists have begun to mark out new ground for robust conversation. Tom McLeish‘s book Faith and Wisdom in Science (Oxford University Press, 2014) takes this conversation to new heights. Locating the impulse for science in much biblical literature, particularly the wisdom books of the Hebrew Bible, he shows how one might understand science as a theological endeavor. Rather than a paradigm of “science and theology,” he posits a “theology of science,” an interrelationship that not only gives us new eyes with which to read the history of science more coherently but also yields a renewed appreciation for science as part of a “ministry of reconciliation” with the natural world and the causes of human suffering. Tom McLeish is Professor of Physics and former Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research at Durham University. He studied for his first degree and PhD in polymer physics at the University of Cambridge and in 1987 became a lecturer in physics at the University of Sheffield. In 1993 he took the chair in polymer physics at the University of Leeds. He took up his current position in Durham in 2008. He is a fellow of the Institute of Physics, the Royal Society of Chemistry, the American Physical Society, and the Royal Society. He is also involved in science communication with the public via radio, television, and school lectures, discussing topics ranging from the physics of slime to the interaction of faith and science. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Much of the public debate about the relationship between science and theology has been antagonistic or adversarial. Proponents on both sides argue that their respective claims are contradictory–that the claims of science trump and even discredit the claims of religion or theology. Some have sought to portray the relationship in a different light. The evolutionary biologist Stephen J. Gould famously asserted that the two realms were “nonoverlapping magisteria.” But recently theologians and scientists have begun to mark out new ground for robust conversation. Tom McLeish‘s book Faith and Wisdom in Science (Oxford University Press, 2014) takes this conversation to new heights. Locating the impulse for science in much biblical literature, particularly the wisdom books of the Hebrew Bible, he shows how one might understand science as a theological endeavor. Rather than a paradigm of “science and theology,” he posits a “theology of science,” an interrelationship that not only gives us new eyes with which to read the history of science more coherently but also yields a renewed appreciation for science as part of a “ministry of reconciliation” with the natural world and the causes of human suffering. Tom McLeish is Professor of Physics and former Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research at Durham University. He studied for his first degree and PhD in polymer physics at the University of Cambridge and in 1987 became a lecturer in physics at the University of Sheffield. In 1993 he took the chair in polymer physics at the University of Leeds. He took up his current position in Durham in 2008. He is a fellow of the Institute of Physics, the Royal Society of Chemistry, the American Physical Society, and the Royal Society. He is also involved in science communication with the public via radio, television, and school lectures, discussing topics ranging from the physics of slime to the interaction of faith and science. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Much of the public debate about the relationship between science and theology has been antagonistic or adversarial. Proponents on both sides argue that their respective claims are contradictory–that the claims of science trump and even discredit the claims of religion or theology. Some have sought to portray the relationship in a different light. The evolutionary biologist Stephen J. Gould famously asserted that the two realms were “nonoverlapping magisteria.” But recently theologians and scientists have begun to mark out new ground for robust conversation. Tom McLeish‘s book Faith and Wisdom in Science (Oxford University Press, 2014) takes this conversation to new heights. Locating the impulse for science in much biblical literature, particularly the wisdom books of the Hebrew Bible, he shows how one might understand science as a theological endeavor. Rather than a paradigm of “science and theology,” he posits a “theology of science,” an interrelationship that not only gives us new eyes with which to read the history of science more coherently but also yields a renewed appreciation for science as part of a “ministry of reconciliation” with the natural world and the causes of human suffering. Tom McLeish is Professor of Physics and former Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research at Durham University. He studied for his first degree and PhD in polymer physics at the University of Cambridge and in 1987 became a lecturer in physics at the University of Sheffield. In 1993 he took the chair in polymer physics at the University of Leeds. He took up his current position in Durham in 2008. He is a fellow of the Institute of Physics, the Royal Society of Chemistry, the American Physical Society, and the Royal Society. He is also involved in science communication with the public via radio, television, and school lectures, discussing topics ranging from the physics of slime to the interaction of faith and science. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Much of the public debate about the relationship between science and theology has been antagonistic or adversarial. Proponents on both sides argue that their respective claims are contradictory–that the claims of science trump and even discredit the claims of religion or theology. Some have sought to portray the relationship in a different light. The evolutionary biologist Stephen J. Gould famously asserted that the two realms were “nonoverlapping magisteria.” But recently theologians and scientists have begun to mark out new ground for robust conversation. Tom McLeish‘s book Faith and Wisdom in Science (Oxford University Press, 2014) takes this conversation to new heights. Locating the impulse for science in much biblical literature, particularly the wisdom books of the Hebrew Bible, he shows how one might understand science as a theological endeavor. Rather than a paradigm of “science and theology,” he posits a “theology of science,” an interrelationship that not only gives us new eyes with which to read the history of science more coherently but also yields a renewed appreciation for science as part of a “ministry of reconciliation” with the natural world and the causes of human suffering. Tom McLeish is Professor of Physics and former Pro-Vice-Chancellor for Research at Durham University. He studied for his first degree and PhD in polymer physics at the University of Cambridge and in 1987 became a lecturer in physics at the University of Sheffield. In 1993 he took the chair in polymer physics at the University of Leeds. He took up his current position in Durham in 2008. He is a fellow of the Institute of Physics, the Royal Society of Chemistry, the American Physical Society, and the Royal Society. He is also involved in science communication with the public via radio, television, and school lectures, discussing topics ranging from the physics of slime to the interaction of faith and science. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Cela fait plusieurs semaines qu’un nouvel épisode n’était pas sorti, mais le voici ! Le précédent (hormis le hors-série enregistré pendant l’évènement #PSatCERN et celui sur mon interview par Jean-Michel Abrassart pour Scepticisme Scientifique) était à propos du livre “L’Imposture Scientifique en 10 Leçons” de Michel de Pracontal. Un livre très intéressant pour qui souhaite comprendre un peu mieux comment différencier la science de l’imposture.Aujourd’hui nous allons un peu parler de biologie avec le livre : “Quand les poules auront des dents” de Stephen Jay Gould. Avec ce livre on aborde un certain nombre des essais qu’il a pu écrire au cours de sa carrière à propos de créationnisme, biologie, évolution ou encore démystification d’imposture scientifique.Quand les poules auront des dents - crédit Amazon : http://goo.gl/P4nfPa SommaireQuelques mots sur Stephen Jay GouldLe livre “Quand les poules auront des dents”Un livre qui n’a rien à voirUn livre que j’aimerais lireUne quoteDes plugsUn auteurStephen Jay Gould - crédit goodreads : http://goo.gl/YrqYWqStephen Jay Gould représente pour beaucoup un exemple dans le combat contre l’ignorance, les pseudo-sciences et le créationnisme. La première fois que j’ai entendu parlé de lui, ce fut lors d’un des épisodes de Podcastscience réalisé par Marco. Il devait s’agit de celui sur l’audition chez les vertébrés je crois.Stephen Jay Gould est un scientifique né en 1941 et mort il y a maintenant un peu plus de 10 ans, en mai 2002. Paléonthologue américain, il a été professeur de géologie et d’histoire des sciences à Harvard et il est énormément connu pour la vulgarisation qu’il a fait de la théorie de l’évolution.Stephen Jay Gould est ainsi connu pour au moins deux combats : son travail de vulgarisation sur l’évolution et notamment autour de la théorie qu’il a mis en avant sur les équilibres ponctués et sa volonté de combattre le créationniste et plus particulièrement le dessein intelligent.En ce qui concerne l’évolution il a d’ailleurs beaucoup œuvré dans la critique des visions adaptationistes à outrance que certains biologistes ont eu tendance à appliquer à tout va lorsqu’il était nécessaire de devoir expliquer certains caractères d’espèces. Pierre Kerner et Marco en ont d’ailleurs parlé dans divers épisodes de Podcastscience, que ce soit dans la discussion du premier avec X0chipili ou à propos des œufs de kiwi ou du mystère de l’ornithorynque pour le second.Mais revenons à Stephen Jay Gould. Comme je le disais, un de ses apports à la science fut la mise au point, avec Niels Eldredge en 1972 de la théorie des équilibres ponctués. Théorie selon laquelle les changements évolutifs se produisent sur des temps relativement courts entrecoupés de longues périodes de “calme” évolutif. Cette théorie a d’ailleurs été l’un des sujets de discorde entre lui et l’autre grand évolutionniste de l’époque, Richard Dawkins, qui était plutôt en faveur de la notion de gêne égoïste. Aujourd’hui la théorie de Stephen Jay Gould reste celle envers laquelle le plus de preuves ont été accumulées.Comme tout scientifique, 100% de la communauté n’est pas vouée à sa cause (comme je viens de le dire avec Richard Dawkins) et divers scientifiques critiquent sa théorie ou sa manière d’en parler. Ceci n’enlève rien au travail, félicité par tous et même Richard Dawkins, qu’il a fait pour vulgariser et attirer à la biologie évolutionniste pléthore d’étudiants ayant lu ses ouvrages.Pour ses différents travaux en science et aussi en vulgarisation, Stephen Jay Gould a reçu de nombreux prix comme médaille linnéenne en 1992 remise à des biologistes et zoologistes de renom depuis 1888 par la Linnean Society of London (Thomas Henry Huxley ou Alfred Russel Wallace l’ont reçu par exemple, mais aussi Arthur Smith Woodward dont parle Gould à propos de la supercherie de l’homme de Piltdown), le prix Charles Schuchert en 1975 (remis à une personne de moins de 40 ans ayant réalisé de grands travaux en paléonthologie), la médaille de la Paleontological Society en 2002 ou encore la médaille Darwin-Wallace en 2008 qui n’est remise que tous les cinquante ans par la Linnean Society of London.Je crois que peu de biologistes auront été autant récompensés pour leurs travaux !En ce qui concerne ses œuvres, on peut dire que Stephen Jay Gould fut un écrivain prolifique ! Il écrivit quasiment un ouvrage par an depuis 1977 ! Les plus connus furent ceux qui sont estampillés “réflexions sur l’histoire naturelle” et qui correspondent aux articles parus dans Nature History entre 1974 et 2001. Parmi ses ouvrages on peut notamment retrouver : “Darwin et les grandes énigmes de la vie”, “Le pouce du panda”, “Quand les poules auront des dents”, “Le sourire du flamant rose” ou encore “La foire aux dinosaures”.Un livreAvant-proposIl est important, je pense, d’expliquer tout d’abord, que j’ai toujours plutôt eu un faible pour la physique et les mathématiques. Ce n’est pas que la biologie ne m’ait pas réussi pendant mes années d’études, mais il faut bien faire des choix. Et c’est ainsi plutôt vers les sciences physiques et les mathématiques que j’ai penchées. Je crois que c’est une perception plus grande de justesse peut-être que je percevais à l’époque dans ces sciences qui me semblaient plus “dures”. Ou cette opinion que je viens de donner n’est qu’une perception rétrospective à la lumière de ce que j’ai appris par la suite sur ces diverses matières.La biologie au sens large, je dirais presque les sciences du vivant, n’en demeurent pas moins fascinantes du fait des questions auxquelles elles essayent d’apporter des réponses : quel est l’arbre généalogique de l’Homme, comment s’est construit le vivant, du plus petit organisme au plus grand, du plus complexe au plus simple ? Encore que cette dernière question ne soit peut-être pas la plus pertinente à postériori.Pour revenir à l’ouvrage d’aujourd’hui : si j’ai souhaité le lire, avant d’avoir l’idée d’en faire une revue, c’est parce que j’avais aussi envie d’ouvrir un peu l’horizon de mes connaissances : Il est bon de lire des livres et de savoir que l’on connaît le sujet qui est abordé, mais il est aussi bon de pouvoir découvrir, tout simplement, des choses comme ce que raconte Stephen Jay Gould dans son ouvrage. Et même si il s’agit d’une traduction en français, je pense, tout du moins j’espère, que l’écriture qui lui est propre transparaît suffisamment pour que l’écriture puisse être autant appréciée que le contenu.Quand j’ai ouvert le livre j’ai été un peu déçu au premier abord. J’ai en effet découvert que ce n’était pas le premier de la série. Pour un amateur de SF et de grandes sagas comme celle des Fondations d’Asimov, de Dune d’Herbert ou des Princes d’Ambre de Zelazny, c’était presque une hérésie ou une folie de ma part de commencer au milieu ! Puis finalement j’ai compris que d’une part il s’agissait d’un regroupement de textes plutôt indépendants les uns des autres, et que je n’allais pas attendre d’avoir acheté ceux qui venaient avant pour lire celui-ci, j’était trop pressé de découvrir Stephen Jay Gould et ses écrits. Je m’y suis donc mis.La revueLe livre est organisé en plusieurs parties dont le contenu (plusieurs essais à chaque fois) est regroupé par thème : les noms des parties. Un bon point pour un peu de cohérence. Comme quoi, un peu d’organisation ne fait jamais de mal. Enfin je dis ça mais ne venez jamais voir mon bureau. Ce ne sera pas le mien d’ailleurs.Pour en revenir au livre : la première partie traite de “bizarreries raisonnables”. Ici Stephen Jay Gould nous parle de divers animaux, plus étranges les uns que les autres, pour ne pas dire bizarres. Il nous parle entre autres de la dissymétrie entre les deux sexes pour diverses espèces et des théories parfois les plus farfelues qu’il y a pu avoir sur le fait que pour un certain nombre d’entre elles, les mâles sont bien plus petits que les femelles. On découvre ainsi que certaines espèces dont on croyait les organismes hermaphrodites ne l’étaient pas mais que le mâle s’accrochait à la femelle et perdait quasiment tous ses organismes. Certains diront sauf le plus important : les testicules. On apprend aussi que presque de la même manière, le mâle de la baudroie, nain lui aussi, s’accroche à elle et se fixe de manière définitive à elle. Les systèmes sanguins des deux organismes fusionnent et le mâle devient dépendant de la femelle et en échange de son maintient en vie, lui donne son matériel génétique.Dans cette partie Stephen Jay Gould nous parle aussi des parasites et notamment des ichneumons dont une partie de la croissance se passe au sein d’un hôte dont ils se repaissent. Cet état de fait a beaucoup fait réfléchir les ecclésiastes du 18ème et 19ème siècle : comment un Dieu plein de bonté pouvait créer de telles créatures? Ou alors faut-il plutôt voir là l’amour des parents qui cherchent par tous les moyens à assurer la survivance de leurs progénitures ? Finalement : ne doit-il peut-être y avoir aucune morale dans tout cela, ni aucun message quant à l’éthique ?Dans sa seconde partie, Stephen Jay Gould nous présente un certain nombre de personnes, enfin, surtout de personnalités du monde de la paléontologie. Dans cette partie on en apprend plus sur celui qui fut considéré comme le premier géologue moderne, Sténon. On découvre ainsi comment ses considérations ont abouti aux idées de classifications qui sont aujourd’hui la base d’un certain nombre de spécialités, comme la taxinomie par exemple. On en apprend un peu plus aussi sur le renversement des principes de cause et de conséquence avec la problématique de cause finale et notamment son usage par James Hutton dans son étude de la Terre. Même si ce dernier a utilisé la méthode scientifique pour réaliser ses travaux, il était néanmoins gouverné par ces fameuses causes finales pour diriger ses recherches. On comprend aussi comment Cuvier, au sommet de son art, fut néanmoins éclipsé par Darwin et ses adeptes, malgré une méthode scientifique rigoureuse, parce qu’il était gouverné par des principes créationnistes et catastrophistes. Il reste pourtant l’un de ceux qui mirent en avant la possibilité d’existence d’espèces disparues (une chose impossibles pour les scientifiques de l’époque) et les méthodes d’analyse de fossiles. Il est enfin intéressant d’en apprendre un peu sur cet autre grand naturaliste du 19ème siècle, mais américain celui-là : Agassiz. Pas le tennisman hein. Il a longtemps souhaité montrer que Darwin se trompait et que le créationnisme était la vraie bonne parole. Je vous passe aussi le chapitre sur Lyssenko et Vavilov qui est un bon complément de l’épisode de Podcastscience qu’avait fait Xilrian sur ce premier. Pour ceux qui l’ont écouté c’est un bon complément car plutôt centré sur Vavilov, pour ceux qui ne l’ont pas fait, lisez ce chapitre et écoutez l’épisode ! Ils vont bien ensemble.Dans sa troisième partie Stephen Jay Gould nous parle des choses qu’il cherche à combattre en biologie : l’adaptationisme à outrance et la démystification de croyances biologiques passées. On en apprend ainsi plus sur les mythes autour de la hyène : un croisement entre un chien et un chat pour certains, un animal qui est hermaphrodite, etc ? Stephen Jay Gould discute ensuite d’un point intéressant : est-ce que des animaux disposent de roue ? C’est vrai que selon certains c’est la meilleure forme pour se déplacer ! Très intéressant et drôle comme chapitre! Il continue ensuite par discuter de l’ADN, de sa répétition dans les chromosomes et les éventuelles raisons qui pourrait expliquer ces répétitions. Il aborde ainsi la question de l’ADN égoïste. Tout ceci vous fait penser aux théories de quelqu’un ? Il essaie de la comparer à celle qui dirait qu’il y a plusieurs niveaux d’évolution et que ce n’est pas juste soit au niveau du gène/ADN ou au niveau de l’individu, mais peut-être à ces deux niveaux en même temps et à d’autres aussi. Les deux chapitres suivants de cette partie traitent des aberrations, comme les chevaux possédant plusieurs doigts, ou les “monstres” comme par exemple ces mouches avec des mutations qui leur font pousser des pâtes à la place des antennes. Stephen Jay Gould explique ce qu’ils représentent pour l’évolution et comment ils trouvent leur place dans ce grand processus.Dans sa quatrième partie, l’auteur nous parle d’une enquête qu’il a réalisé sur ce que l’on appelle aujourd’hui la supercherie de Piltdown avec un focus tout particulier sur la participation qu’aurait eu, selon lui, Teilhard de Chardin. Je ne connaissais pas cette histoire de supercherie. Il est intéressant de comprendre comment elle s’est construite et les raisons plus profondes de certains scientifiques anglais d’avoir eux aussi un Homme de quelque chose qui remettrait l’Angleterre au centre du jeu. Il est aussi intéressant de découvrir comment Teilhard de Chardin aurait été impliqué dans cette supercherie, lui qui fut le découvreur de l’Homme de Pékin bien plus tard. On découvre d’ailleurs les éléments qu’amena Stephen Jay Gould à propos de l’implication supposée de Teilhard de Chardin et les réactions provoquées par la suite, par forcément toujours positives … Histoire d’expliquer à ceux qui ne connaîtraient pas ses théories, Stephen Jay Gould prend d’ailleurs le temps de les présenter et montrer quel impact elles ont eu sur la société et la réminiscence que l’on peut percevoir dans 2001 l’odyssée de l’espace par exemple.Dans la cinquième partie, Stephen Jay Gould nous parle des liens entre la science, la politique et la religion. Car l’un des autres combats de l’auteur, était d’arriver à combattre le créationnisme. Il nous parle ainsi du procès de Clarence Darrow et du poids du créationnisme aux États-Unis. On apprend aussi que le flou laissé sur le mot “théorie” aux États-Unis est une des sources classiques qu’utilisent les créationnistes pour semer le trouble sur la Théorie de l’évolution et ce qu’elle est vraiment : non pas une chose qui se doit d’être prouvée, mais un édifice solide sur lequel s’appuie et que consolide pléthore de preuves. Stephen Jay Gould explique d’ailleurs certains des arguments des créationnistes pour remettre en cause cette théorie. Il s’extasie d’ailleurs, si l’on peut dire, du fait que les créationnistes utilisent la théorie des équilibres ponctués qu’il a développé contre lui et l’évolution alors qu’elle ne vient que la compléter ! Stephen Jay Gould continue ensuite en nous expliquant comment les tests de QI et les statistiques ont été utilisés à des fins racistes à l’encontre des juifs notamment aux États-Unis ou comment le recensement a été utilisé comme un outil politique mettant en avant la surreprésentation des aliénés et des malades mentaux chez les populations noires et entre le Nord et le Sud ou entre le centre des villes et leurs périphéries. Certaines conclusions allaient même jusqu’à annoncer que l’esclavage avait été un bienfait pour ces populations …Dans la sixième partie on en apprend un peu plus sur l’extinction et les théories qui ont existé quand à la présentation de la mort comme une chose que l’évolution pourrait combattre. Stephen Jay Gould commence ainsi par un chapitre plutôt drôle : basé sur certaines lois concernant l’augmentation de la taille, ou la diminution des organismes, il est allé jusqu’à proposer une loi identique pour des friandises ! Il est en effet question de l’extinction et de l’apparition des barres Hershey au cours du temps avec l’évolution des prix associés. Cet essai, plutôt amusant, est parsemé d’exemple de la Nature sur la question et c’est assez rafraichissant. Il est d’ailleurs marrant de voir dans le post-scriptum qu’il constate que ses prédictions se sont vues vérifiées et qu’une Grande Exception est aussi apparue ! Comme quoi les paléontologistes savent aussi bien s’amuser. Dans la suite de cette partie Stephen Jay Gould présente une théorie pour expliquer la grande extinction du Crétacé : celle d’un astéroïde qui aurait frappé la Terre, comme en témoigne les niveaux d’iridium découverts dans les strates géologiques tout en mettant en avant que cette hypothèse serait l’un des éléments majeurs, mais pas le seul de l’extinction observée.Dans la dernière partie Stephen Jay Gould nous parle des zèbres. Vous allez me dire que le sujet est bien basique par rapport au reste du livre. Mais ceci n’est qu’apparence, car à la question : “Les zèbres sont-ils blancs avec des rayures noires ou noirs avez des rayures blanches?” il n’y a pas de réponse toute faite. Parce qu’il faut déjà savoir ce qu’est un zèbre ! Derrière la question évidente que cette affirmation soulève, Stephen Jay Gould nous explique ce qu’est la cladistique et comment la question paraît plus ardue à répondre que l’on pourrait croire. Il continue ensuite par nous expliquer ce que sont les rayures, sont-elles blanches ou noires et comment apparaissent-elles ? Et pour répondre à la question : ils sont noirs avec des rayures blanches !En conclusionEn conclusion, que dire sur ce livre ? Déjà : on apprend plein de choses, mais alors plein ! C’est vraiment intéressant, quand, comme moi, on est un peu limite côté biologie et évolution, d’en apprendre tant et de manière si fluide et sans longueur sur des sujets aussi variés : évolution, créationnisme, paléontologie, supercherie, etc.C’est aussi un ouvrage très bien écrit. Il ne s’agit certes pas de la version originale, mais d’une traduction, cependant, de bonne qualité et je pense que l’on entrevoit quand même le style de Stephen Jay Gould dans la narration et sa manière de présenter les faits.Il est important de noter que Michel de Pracontal cite un certain nombre de fois ce livre dans son ouvrage “L’imposture scientifique en 10 leçons”, dont je vous ai parlé de le dernier épisode. Il y a de quoi. L’ouvrage cherche à éclairer et à présenter des faits prouvés par la science qui permettent de remettre en cause certains affirmations fausses qui pourraient être faites contre la théorie de l’évolution.Je dois dire que ce livre m’a donné envie d’en savoir plus sur la théorie de l’évolution, il m’a donné envie de lire plus d’ouvrages de Stephen Jay Gould, des ouvrages de Richard Dawkins et même d’autres qui aborderaient les thèmes chers à Gould.Un livre qui n’a rien à voirContact - crédit goodreads : http://goo.gl/hC9VzO Comme livre qui n’a rien à voir, j’ai décidé de choisir le livre de Carl Sagan : Contact. Carl Sagan est sûrement l’un des scientifiques vulgarisateurs les plus connus. Il est aussi le créateur du SETI ou programme de recherche d’intelligence extra-terrestre. Contact est un livre qui a écrit en 1985 et qui a ensuite été adapté pour le cinéma en 1997 par Robert Zemeckis. On y retrouve notamment Matthew McConaughey et la grande Jodie Foster. On y suit l’histoire d’Ellie Arroway, jeune astronome, dont la vie change radicalement le jour où elle identifie dans les signaux reçus de l’espace ceux d’une intelligence extra-terrestre envoyant le plan de construction d’une machine fantastique qui changera la place de l’Humanité dans le Cosmos. Le film ne suit pas exactement le livre dans tous ces aspects, mais chacun d’entre eux propose une histoire agréable à lire ou à regarder et outre les qualités d’écrivain de Carl Sagan, Jodie Foster propose une interprétation magnifique. C’est bien écrit, intelligent, et cela laisse un souvenir impérissable avec un petit goût de reviens-y. Un livre que j’aimerais lireComment construire une machine à explorer le temps - crédit amazon.fr : http://goo.gl/EaNHTm Aujourd’hui, comme livre à lire j’ai trouvé quelque chose dont le nom est plutôt drôle et accrocheur : “Comment construire une machine à explorer le temps?” de Paul Davies. Ce livre, écrit en 2001, décrit comment la réponse à la question est clairement oui! Et l’auteur nous explique comment est-ce que la physique pourrait nous permettre de visiter le futur et explorer le passé. Afin de ne pas être en reste, il donne même un plan en quatre étapes pour construire cette fameuse machine ! Je pense que ce livre doit être dans la même veine que “The Physics of Star Trek” de Laurence Krauss ou encore “La SF sous les feux de la science” de Roland Lehoucq, drôle, scientifiquement valide et rafraichissant à lire. Et puis mince ! Le voyage dans le temps les amis ! Avec ça je devrais pouvoir passer moins de temps à rédiger ces épisodes et en faire plus. C’est parfait.Quote J’ai un petit faible pour Isaac Asimov, alors je vous propose une citation de ce célèbre écrivain et sceptique :Your assumptions are your windows on the world. Scrub them off every once in a while, or the light won't come in.Isaac AsimovPlugs et liens évoquésTout d’abord, désolé de ne pas avoir sorti d’épisode depuis aussi longtemps. Je l’ai déjà dit, et je vais sûrement encore le dire je pense, mais le temps est précieux et il est difficile d’en trouver. Mais j’y arrive quand même !Je crois que je n’ai pas encore eu l’occasion de citer le podcast de Jean-Michel Abrassart, Scepticisme Scientifique ? Et bien c’est chose faite. Il s’agit d’un podcast très intéressant à écouter si vous souhaitez en savoir un peu plus sur les phénomènes étranges et sur le mouvement sceptique qui tente de clarifier les choses et en donner des visions scientifiques et prosaïques afin de faire infuser la science et non les idées fausses.J’aimerais aussi mentionner le fait que le Dr Éric Simon a un podcast qui reprend les billets qu’il propose sur son blog “Ça se passe là-haut”. À écouter absolument si vous n’avez pas le temps de lire le blog :Le blog http://drericsimon.blogspot.frLe podcast : http://casepasselahaut.podcloud.fr/Page wikipédia de Stephen Jay Gould : http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Jay_GouldÉpisode 103 de Podcastscience par Xilrian sur LyssenkoQuelques épisodes de Podcastscience sur l’évolution (je ne les ai pas tous mis!) :Épisode 67 sur l’évolution de l’audition chez les vertébrés par MarcoÉpisode 128 sur l’évolution avec une discussion entre Pierre Kerner et X0chipili Épisode 75 sur l’ornithorynque par MarcoÉpisode 61 sur l’oeuf de kiwi par MarcoLes trois épisodes de Pierre Kerner sur l’arbre du vivant : 49, 50 et 51Et comme quand on parle d’évolution, on ne peut pas ne pas citer Richard Dawkins (d’autant plus que Stephen Jay Gould le fait dans son livre) vous pouvez le retrouver sur :Sa page wikipédia de Richard Dawkins : http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_DawkinsSon compte twitter de Richard Dawkins : @RichardDawkinsConclusionQue vous ayez aimé ou pas, surtout, ne restez pas les bras croisés. Inondez-nous de courrier, de commentaires, de like - ou pas - de tweets, de retweets, de clin d’oeils, de cartouche de silicone, c’est toujours utile pour faire un joint à gauche à droite ou l’oeuvre complète de Isaac Asimov si jamais elle ne vous sert que de litière pour votre animal de compagnie.Vous pouvez ainsi retrouver LisezLaScience sur son site web http://lisezlascience.wordpress.com Vous pouvez aussi me contacter sur twitter sur @LisezLaScience et le podcast est accessible sur podcloud et sur podcastfrance (http://podcastfrance.fr/podcast-lisez-la-science).Vous pouvez aussi m’envoyer des e-mails à lisezlascience@gmail.comVous pouvez d’ailleurs retrouver l’ensemble des livres cités sur la liste goodreads associée à ce podcast sur le compte de LisezLaScience. Les livres seront placés sur des “étagères” spécifiques par épisode et ceux de celui-ci sont sur l’étagère “lls-8”Prochain épisodeOn se retrouve le 02/11 (on sait jamais, je peux peut-être y arriver) pour un nouvel épisode sur Désir d’Infini de Trinh Xuan Thuan.D’ici là bonne quinzaine à toutes et à tous.Les références des livres évoquésQuand les poules auront des dentsISBN : 2757824937 (ISBN13 : 978-2757824931)Auteur : Stephen Jay GouldNombre de pages : 480 pagesDate de parution : 23/05/2011 chez PointsPrix : 10,10 € chez Amazon ou à la FnacDarwin et les grandes énigmes de la vieISBN : 2020069806 (ISBN13 : 978-2020069809)Auteur : Stephen Jay GouldNombre de pages : 299 pagesDate de parution : 01/10/1984 au SeuilPrix : 8,10 € chez Amazon ou à la FnacLe pouce du pandaISBN : 2757846264 (ISBN13 : 978-2757846261)Auteur : Stephen Jay GouldNombre de pages : 400 pagesDate de parution : 09/10/2014 chez PointsPrix : 10,50 € chez Amazon ou à la FnacLe sourire du flamant roseISBN : 2020194163 (ISBN13 : 978-2020194167)Auteur : Stephen Jay GouldNombre de pages : 516 pagesDate de parution : 03/02/2000 au SeuilPrix : 10,70 € chez Amazon ou à la FnacLa foire aux dinosauresISBN : 2020324202 (ISBN13 : 978-2020324205)Auteur : Stephen Jay GouldNombre de pages : 662 pagesDate de parution : 10/09/1997 au SeuilPrix : 10,10 € chez Amazon ou à la FnacContactISBN : 2354081286 (ISBN13 : 978-2354081287)Auteur : Carl SaganNombre de pages : 352 pagesDate de parution : 04/11/2011 chez MnémosPrix : 22,30 € chez Amazon ou à la FnacComment construire une machine à explorer le temps?ISBN : 286883941X (ISBN13 : 978-2868839411)Auteur : Paul DaviesNombre de pages : 119 pagesDate de parution : 29/03/2007 chez EDP SciencesPrix : 14,00 € chez Amazon ou à la Fnac Vous pouvez retrouver la liste des livres dans goodreads à l’adresse suivante : https://www.goodreads.com/review/list/30797714-lisezlascience?shelf=lls-8
Today I will be speaking with Cheryl Jorgensen, one of the premier experts on inclusive education with over 30 years in the field. I had the pleasure of visiting with her one evening in January of this year. Cheryl and I discuss why it has taken so long for inclusive education to catch on in the United States and what needs to happen to break the barrier for it to become part of best practices for education. She even gives me advice on whether I need to quit my job or not. You will not want to miss her surprising answer. Partners in Policymaking (MN) The Mismeasure of Man by Stephen J. Gould --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/think-inclusive/support
I always learn something when I interview authors, but in this chat with Todd H. Weir I learned something startling: I'm a monist. What is more, you may be a monist too and not even know it. Do you believe that there is really only one kind of stuff and that everything we observe–and our powers of observation themselves–are made of that stuff? If so, you're a monist. But what kind? As Todd explains, the history of monism is not monistic: since its birth in the nineteenth century, there have been multiple monisms (which, you must admit, is a diverting irony). You can read about many of them in Monism: Science, Philosophy, Religion, and the History of a Worldview (Palgrave, 2012), the edited volume Todd and I discuss in the interview. Despite their differences, all the monisms were radical, for they implied that there was no God and that religion was essentially an evolved superstition. This being so, monism was always controversial. It still is. Stephen J. Gould didn't like it, but his colleague E.O. Wilson and most of the “New Atheists” do. Listen in and see where you stand. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
A panel of marketing professionals speaks about their individual career paths, job functions, experiences within the marketing industry, and how they got where they are now. The event is introduced by Baruch student Maribel A. Lara and moderated by Stephen J. Gould, Professor of Marketing at Graduate Center, City University of New York. Speakers include: Vanessa Bluemke, Manager, Global Makeup Marketing, Estee Lauder; Yaron Dekel, Search Media Analyst, Microsoft; Carolyn Glassberg, Retail Sales Administration Analyst, Elizabeth Arden; Francois Guillon, Director of Business Planning and Reporting, Tiffany & Co.; and Rachel Jacobs, Associate Client Manager, ACNielsen/The Nielsen Company. The event takes place on September 25, 2007, at the Newman Conference Center, Room 750.
The Westminster Confession of Faith Mid-way through the 17th century, some of the greatest theologians that ever lived assembled to put together a statement of faith, the Westminster Confession of Faith. In my mind, one of the greatest doctrinal writings ever. Section on God I can scarcely read without being moved to my heart. I want to begin by reading some of it to you. There is but one only living and true God, who is infinite in being and perfection, a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, parts, or passions; immutable, immense, eternal, incomprehensible, almighty, most wise, most holy, most free, most absolute, working all things according to the counsel of His own immutable and most righteous will, for His own glory; most loving, gracious, merciful, long-suffering, abundant in goodness and truth, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin, the rewarder of them that diligently seek Him; ... most just, and terrible in His judgments; hating all sin, and who will by no means clear the guilty. God has all life, glory, goodness, blessedness, in and of Himself; and is alone in and unto Himself all-sufficient, not standing in need of any creatures which He hath made, not deriving any glory from them, but only manifesting His own glory in, by, unto, and upon them: He is the sole fountain of all being, of whom, through whom, and to whom are all things, and has most sovereign dominion over them, to do by them, for them, or upon them whatsoever He Himself pleases. In His sight all things are open and manifest; His knowledge is infinite, infallible, and independent upon the creature, so as nothing is to Him contingent, or uncertain. He is most holy in all His counsels, in all His works, and in all His commands. To Him is due from angels and men, and every other creature, whatsoever worship, service, or obedience He is pleased to require of them. Now, that last line is why I read the whole thing. I struggle believing that, but I know in my heart it's true. That God is worthy of anything that He requires of me. Even if it would be my own child. Sometime 4000 years ago, God did in fact command one of His choice servants Abraham to sacrifice his own son, Isaac. And this God that we have discussed, that we have worshipped this morning is worthy of whatever worship He may require of you. And my only desire in preaching this sermon is to free you up from any restrictions, so that you can obey Him more fully than you have ever obeyed Him before by faith alone. That you may imitate the faith of Abraham. He will not command you to do what He commanded Abraham to do, but he will command you to do difficult things. And my only desire is to build up your faith so that you may obey Him and do those difficult things He commands you to do. I. God’s Test of Abraham’s Faith: The Sacrifice of Isaac Now, we're right in the middle of Hebrews chapter 11, this great faith chapter. The whole pressure, the whole press of the chapter is to build in the hearers, the readers a growing faith, to strengthen our faith that we may realize that we are not only justified by faith, but we are to live by faith, moment by moment. And the same faith that justifies is the faith that we must live out day by day. And so the author has given us these marvelous examples, and this is one of the pinnacle examples in all redemptive history, what I call today, the second greatest act of faith in history. And what is the test? What was Abraham asked to do? What was he commanded to do? In verse 17, "By faith Abraham, when God tested him offered Isaac as a sacrifice." The command comes very plainly in the Genesis account, you know it well I know. Genesis 22:1-2, there it says, "Sometime later, God tested Abraham. He said to him, 'Abraham!' 'Here I am, he replied.' Then God said, 'Take your son, your only son, Isaac whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains I will tell you about.'" Now, who is this man who is so severely tested, this is Abraham who is called our father in faith, this is the one that God commanded to leave all of the Chaldees and go to the land He would show him. In Genesis 12, saying that through his offspring all peoples on earth would be blessed. This is the one who in Genesis 12, built an altar and called on the name of the Lord. This is the one who, in Genesis 13, God spoke to him after Lot left Him and said, "To your descendants I give this land." This is the one who blessed... Who was blessed by Melchizedek, and who Abraham gave him a tenth of everything. He who is priest of God most high, after the defeat of the kings in Genesis 14. This is the one to whom God had appeared in a vision in Genesis 15. And said, "Do not be afraid Abram, I am your shield, I am your very great reward." And then God took him out under the starlet sky and said, "Look up at the stars, count them if you can... So shall your offspring be" This is the one with whom God had made a very serious and solemn covenant in that same chapter, Genesis 15, and God represented by a smoking fire pod appeared when a dreadful darkness had come over Abraham, and he moved through the pieces of the sacrifice as if to say, "If I don't keep this promise, this covenant of mine, may I cease to exist, may I be exploded as this... The bodies of these sacrifices have been laid aside. May I be also destroyed if I don't keep this promise, this covenant." This is the one to whom God had given the covenant of circumcision in Genesis 17. The one who had said, "I am God almighty, walk before me and be blameless." The one to whom God appeared in Genesis 18, in the heat of the day and with two other angels, and the one who had made a promise "About this time next year, I will return, and Sarah will have a a son." This is the one who said within himself, "Shall I hide from Abraham. What I'm about to do?" (to Sodom and Gomorrah). And who opened up His counsel to Abraham and drew him in and the two of them had a discussion over the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah. And therefore in two places in scripture, Abraham was called God's friend. Both in Isaiah and in James. This is the one whom God severely tested. And so, I just want to stop right here at this point and say, just make this observation. It is not at all a sign of God's disfavor when he lays on someone a severe test or trial. Not at all a sign of His disfavor. The one he loved the most was His only begotten son, and He laid on him the greatest trial of all. And so what's going to happen when God tests your faith, and when God crushes you under some trial and some affliction, Satan is going to whisper to you that this is plain evidence that God doesn't love you. Don't listen to it. Those whom He loves the most He tests most severely. And so He tested Abraham his friend. And at what stage of life did God tests Abraham? When was this? Well, this was toward the end of Abraham's life. After many trials, after many step. Step by step. God building Abraham in his faith. It was not the raw recruit that God threw into the front line of test. But it was a seasoned veteran. This is graduate school. This is his doctoral dissertation of faith. This is at the end of his life, not at the beginning, like a skillful potter, God had been shaping and molding Abraham's faith all along. So this was not a beginning trial. This was more of a consummating trial. At What Stage of His Life Did He Test Him? And so after a long time at the end of his life after he'd been built up step-by-step, God tested him. And also notice it was in the middle of a very peaceful placid good time in his life. If you look at Genesis 22:1, it says, "And it came to pass after these things." After what things? Well, after the... At least the events of Genesis 21. Well, what happened in Genesis 21? Well, finally the miracle baby was born, the son of laughter, Sarah marveling over it saying, "Am I really going to nurse a child at this age?" And just the joy that Isaac the son of laughter brought into their lives. It was a happy time. And then despite Ishmael mocking and then he was cast out, and there were some family turmoil, but that was over now, God had made it plain that the bond woman and her son must be cast out. And so there was nothing but peace and harmony at that point in Abraham's family life. Furthermore, he was in a comfortable position with the people around him, he had made a covenant with Abimelech at Beersheba. A covenant of peace. And he planted a tamarisk tree in Beersheba, and there he called upon the name of the Lord the eternal God. And Abraham stayed in the land of the Philistines for a long time. So it was a time of peace, of prosperity, of comfort and ease. And like a bolt from the blue comes this command. When all was right with his world. "Take your son, your only son, Isaac whom you love." And you may ask why did God test him? Why? "Sometime later, God tested Abraham." Why Did God “Test” Him? Why Does He “Test” Us? Why does He do it? Well, first of all, God never tempts anyone. I want to make a distinction between temptation and testing? From James Chapter 1. "When tempted no one should say, God is tempting me, for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone." So there must be a distinction in scripture between what James says God never does, and what Genesis 22, Moses says that God did do. So there's a distinction then between temptation and a trial. A temptation, the image in James is being seized and dragged away to do evil. And God never does that. He never puts a magnetic force on your soul, dragging you to do wickedness, that would never be God, God hates evil, everything He's doing in our lives and sanctification is to get us to hate evil as much as He does. But God never tempts anyway. But he does test us. So it's like an assayer office, a testing or a proving the worth of... So the assayer is going to find out whether this chunk really is gold or silver, or something valuable or something that's not. So why does He then test us? First, He does it for His own glory, because God is the one who gave you the faith he then wants to show you how powerful is His gift. And so he gives you the faith and then he puts testing circumstances around you to show that His faith will not fail. The faith that He gave you. And so for his own glory to the glory of God. So you realized it was God that gave you the faith, it is Jesus at the right hand of God, interceding for you concerning your faith, it's Gods work in you from beginning to end, and to God be the glory. And none of that can be proven if you never have any difficult times. If you never have any testing, no trials. No none of that can ever be proven, God cannot be glorified in that way. Secondly, he tests us for our own good for greater assurance. We must imagine that Abraham had a far greater assurance of God's sovereign love for him after this experience, than he did before. And so God test us, and tries us to bring us to full maturity and to greater assurance. The assurance language, I get from Romans 5:3-4. It says, "Not only so, but we rejoice in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance, perseverance produces character, and character produces hope." Now hope equals assurance to me. They're the same thing. And so we have assurance, a greater hope, a greater sense of servitude about the future after those trials are over. And so God does it because he loves us. I want to add another one right here. And that is to purify our faith, not just to test us and show it, but also to purify our faith. This is the one that was added to me as I was sitting in the pew. The fact of the matter is, we are still in danger of idolatry. Is it possible for Abraham and Sarah to idolize Isaac? Certainly, it's possible. God is a jealous God, and He will not have Abraham love Isaac more than he loves Him. And so He strengthens our faith by purifying it of all of his good gifts, so sometimes he's going to take away a good gift to show that the real blessing in it was the giver who's still here. God is still here, He still loves me just as much. Even though the gift has now been taken away. And so we must have our faith purified because we're still in danger. And realized Faith is temporary, anyway you won't need it in heaven. And so it makes sense that it's not a perfect thing, it needs to be purified, it needs to be strengthened all of those things. And then fourthly, God tests, our faith for the good of others. For the on-looking world, for the on-looking audience so that others may be blessed by the way that you are strengthened through your trial in your test. So we know that this is how it works in a local church. When you see someone else suffer well through a trial, you are strengthened. We are all sitting in the school of Abraham today, we're sitting at his feet and learning from him our father in faith, how to trust God. And so we are on the outside looking in, and we are strengthened by the testing that happened to another person. Those are four reasons why God does it. How Could Abraham Morally Obey Such a Command? Now as you read this you may be troubled, you may wonder about this, "Take your son, your only son… and sacrifice him..." How can Abraham morally obey such a repugnant command, it seems repugnant to us. I mean, we already knew from Genesis 9:6, Whoever sheds the blood of man by man shall his blood be shed. Story of Cain and Abel confirms that God is against murder. So clearly, again, we must make a distinction between murder and what God's commanding Abraham to do here. Just as we made a distinction between temptations and trials. How can he morally obey this command, is it immoral for him to do this? And the key answer, and this must be God's absolute sovereignty, that God as the king of the universe, is alone, the standard of righteousness. Whatever God commands is righteous and whatever he forbids is wickedness. He is the standard in the universe. He has an absolute right to do whatever He wants with what He's made. That is the very lesson that we struggle with our whole lives, our rebellious self-struggle with that. Does God really have the right to do that. Yes, he does. God has infinite rights as the creator, the sovereign, the king. He is allowed to command Abraham to do this. It is not immoral, for him to do it, it would have been immoral for him not to do it. So we just have to get our minds around that. Whatever God commands is right? Just like the angel in Revelation 16, when He's pouring out wrath on the rivers, all the fresh water. And the angels celebrating it and worship. The angel in charge of the water is saying, "You are just in these judgments you who are and who were the holy one, because you have so judged." It's really just that simple to the angel. "You told me to do it, it must be right". And so the angel has that attitude, and we should pray in the Lord's prayer, that God's will will be done here on earth, as it is in heaven. With the same kind of trust in the King. So no, it is not immoral for him. Now, let's weight, if we can the greatness of this test. II. The Greatness of the Test This was a great test. What was actually commanded? Well, we've said it, but look at it carefully. "Take your son, your only son, Isaac, whom you love and go to the region of Maria, sacrifice him there as a burnt offering." I just ponder those words. Who was it that Abraham was commanded to sacrifice? It wasn't one of his beasts, it wasn't all of his beasts, wasn't one of his slaves, it wasn't even Ishmael, son whom he definitely loved, the son of the slave woman, it was the son of the promise, it was the one that he and his barren wife had waited for it for a hundred and 90 years respectively. They had waited for this miracle baby, and now the miracle baby is there, the one who is crafted in the womb in Sarah's barren womb by the supernatural power of Almighty God. This is the one through whom all peoples on earth will be blessed. This is the promised baby, this is the seed of Abraham. In Isaac, your seed will be reckoned. This is the seed of Abraham through which the whole world is going to be blessed. Look what it says about him, this heightens in Verse 17 and 18, Hebrews 11:17-18, "He who had received the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son, of whom God had said to him, It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned." This is the one that he loved, the son that he loved, the son of his affection. It's amazing how children can wrap parents around their fingers, they just do it from the time they come home from the hospital. And oh, how we dote on them, and we should, we should cherish them, and we should love them. It's a great picture of God, the Father's love for us, when you have a godly father who loves you that same way. And so there's nothing wrong with it. And He said, "Take your son whom you love, the one you cherish." Matthew Henry put it this way, "And being called to offer up his Isaac, he seemed to be called to destroy and cut off his own family, to cancel the promises of God, to prevent the coming of Christ, to destroy the whole world. To sacrifice his own soul, and his own hopes of salvation, to cut off the church of God at one blow. It was a most terrible trial." Another commentator said, "When God commanded Abraham to leave Ur, the Chaldeans, He was commanding him to turn his back on his past. With this command, He was commanding him to turn his back it seemed on his future." A severe trial. Now, what was it in Abraham's nature that made this such a test? Well, look at Abraham just as a man, what kind of man was he? Was he a cruel man who delighted in cruelty? Did he liked being vicious? Not at all. Look at his reaction to the whole problem with Ishmael, he wanted to find some way that they could all get along, he didn't want to send his son Ishmael away. Had to be told directly by God to do it. So he's tender-hearted, Genesis 21:11 concerning Ishmael, "The matter distressed Abraham greatly, because it concerned his son." And that's speaking of Ishmael. That's a tender-hearted man. Now, what was it in God's dealings with Abraham that made this such a test? Well, it seemed to run contrary to everything God was doing. Talk about connecting the dots, "Now, what's God been doing in my life?" You connect, connect, connect, connect, and then suddenly, this command comes, it doesn't make any sense at all. It seems to be contrary to the very nature of God, this tender-hearted and loving God, the God who is merciful and compassionate, slowed to anger and abounding in love and kindness. It doesn't seem to make any sense, the kind of thing you would think would have come from a demiurge, a demon, Satan himself, not God. Let's be honest, if you had a friend who told you they had heard from God that he was commanded to do this, wouldn't you worry at least? You might go so far as to turn him in to the authorities. This is a strange command, it doesn't seem to line up. It seems difficult to accept that God would command him to do this. And so we are led into the inner workings of Abraham's faith and the nature of his relationship, God's relationship with Abraham. There was no doubt at all, no doubt at all in Abraham's mind, that it was God who was commanding him to do this. God by his pattern of communication, in various ways... And I was tracing over it this morning, as I was looking over it again, God came to Abraham at many times and in various ways as well, sometimes a vision, sometimes just speaking, it says God took him out of the tent to look at the stars. I don't know how that works, how God the Father did that, but there's this walking in it, walking with God there is a sense of incredible relationship between God and Abraham. There was such a closeness, an intimacy, sometimes, like I said, a vision. I don't know what that looked like. However God spoke to Abraham concerning Isaac, he knew it was God, there was no doubt in his mind. III. The Inner Workings of Abraham’s Faith And I find it amazing that Scripture gives us... I would say, no glimpse whatsoever, into Abraham's inner turmoil, or his psychology concerning this command and the three-day journey and all that, none, there's not a word anywhere. Many artists who let's say, painted or who write poems about it, or Michael Card who'll write a song, beautiful song. Three days journey to the sacred place. Boy and a man with a sorrowful face stop probably, but there's nothing in Scripture about it. Tortured, yet faithful to God's command. Stop. Probably, but again, nothing in Scripture about it. John Owen delves into this, he says, "What now must be the workings of his heart towards Isaac, a son whom he’d so long waited for; the only child of his dear wife who was the companion of all his wanderings; this boy who was now growing up, as is most probable, unto the age of sixteen or seventeen years, and had engaged his affections by all ways possible; the security of his old age, the life of his family—his only hope and comfort in this world? And how was he to deal with him? Not to send him out of his family with some provision and a guide, as he sent Ishmael; not to part with him for a time in a foreign country; but to take him himself, bind him, slay him with a knife, and then to burn him to ashes. Who can conceive what convulsions of nature must have happened at that time? Who can put himself into these circumstances without trembling and horror?" Well, that's John Owen, one of the greatest theologians of the Puritan era, he is delving into the psychology of Abraham. I think it's only natural to do it, I just find it fascinating. The Scripture doesn't do it at all. It seems in the end, to have been irrelevant and a material if there were these kinds of torture, and wrangling and all that sort of stuff, what mattered is that he did it, that's what mattered. In the end, he obeyed, that's what mattered, not the wrangling, and all of the torture, and the facial expression. I'm thinking he probably had to control his facial expression during that three-day journey, don't you think? He's got to get the boy there. And so I don't know that you could have seen much on his face, that's just me surmising, I really don't know. Martin Luther, in a family devotion, went into great detail over this, Genesis 22, lots of detail about the sacrifice, Abraham's sacrifice of Isaac. He went into a such great detail that finally, his wife Katie couldn't bear it anymore, and she blurted out, "I do not believe it, God would not have treated His own son like that." "But Katie," said Luther, "He did." It's an amazing thing, and yet, for all of that, for all of the wrangling that Owen said, went on, that Luther said went on, that Michael Card said went on, there's nothing at all. I find that significant, because what really matters in the end is faith and obedience, faith and obedience. I think he probably did with this, the same that he'd done earlier concerning Isaac's conception to begin with. "He did not waver through unbelief regarding the promise of God, but was strengthened in his faith and gave glory to God, being fully convinced that He who had promised had power to do what he had promised." That's what I think was going on. And so in compliance set along with the command of God, he shut his eyes as it were, against all difficulties and consequence, resolving to venture Isaac, posterity truth of promises, to venture everything out on the authority of God. In the end, it was for God and not Abraham, to reconcile this command with the promises. Wasn't Abraham's business to work it all out. Life really is ultimately simple for bond-slaves, amen, just do what you're told. Now you may say, "That's not that easy," believe me, I know what you mean when you say it's not that easy, believe me I know. But in the end it really is that easy, you obey or you disobey. And so the inner wrangling, and the psychology, even all that is just noise really, in the background. Do you have faith and will you obey? Abraham Reasoned by Faith Now, Hebrews 11:19 tells us a little more, it tells us that Abraham reasoned by faith. It actually gives us a glimpse into the workings of his mind on the rational side, not so much the emotional side, not at all actually, but on the rational side, Abraham reasoned that God could raise the dead. Now, this is really astonishing because at least in the record of Scripture, it's never happened before, this would be the first time ever that a dead person had been resurrected. Do you not see what a great thing faith is? Because our God is a great God, God can do anything, faith connects with that, and therefore, God can raise the dead. It's really astonishing, but there'd been no precedent at all. Genesis 22:5 gives us proof that he was expecting this. He said to the servants that were with them, "Stay here with the donkey while I and the boy go over there. We will worship and then we will come back to you." What a big difference between we and I? Alright, "We will worship and I will come back to you," that's a whole different sentence, amen. "We will worship and then we will come back to you." So, as I figure it out, not only did Abraham fully expect a bodily resurrection of Isaac, he expected it immediately, not a year later, five years later, but right there, he'd get him back. God can do anything, God can do anything except break His promise, that He cannot do. Titus 1:2 speaks of "the hope of eternal life which God who does not lie promised before the beginning of time." And so I believe Abraham for that three-day journey, his total focus was on God, not on difficulties, but on the goodness of God, the omnipotence of God, the faithfulness of God, completely on God, and this is the key to everything. The promise of God in Genesis 21:12. Genesis 21:12, remember how... Going back and forth over Ishmael, he doesn't want to send Ishmael out. And God makes something very, very clear to him, which is the key to everything in the next chapter. Genesis 21:12, "But God said to him, Do not be so distressed about the boy, [Ishmael] and your maid servant, [that's Hagar] Listen to whatever Sarah tells you, because it is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned." That is the key to everything, do you not see it? Isaac was with that word, indispensable to the plans of God. It had to be Isaac and no one else. Suppose God had said, "It is through one of Sarah's sons that you're offspring will be reckoned," now that's different, isn't it? Maybe Isaac will die and another son will be raised up. Very, very tough at that point. Now here, I hope gently, take a little thought with the NIV, second time in this chapter. But I just am bewildered by it actually, I don't understand it, it doesn't make much sense to me. What the NIV says is, "He who had received the promises was about to sacrifice his one and only son even though God had said to him, It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned." So it's like, despite the fact of the promise, he went through with it, does that make any sense to you? Please look puzzled and shake your head. It make no sense to me, I have... "Despite the promise, he still went ahead and sacrificed his son." That's what, "even though" means, despite. And the Greek doesn't require at all, none of the other translations have it, it's just "of whom it was said, in Isaac, your offspring will be reckoned." That's all. Friends, it's hard to translate Scripture, and I'm not trying to find faults with those that had labored hard on it. I'm just saying, we're not bound by any of these translations. We have to do our best to understand, and that's why it's helpful to know the original language Psalm. The bottom line is, there's no concussive here at all. It's precisely because God had made this promise that he was able to do it. The Combination of Faith and Reason This is the ground of the reasoning that he's doing it, do you not see it? He's reasoning it out, how does he reason? Well, fact number one, God has promised me that through my offspring all peoples on earth will be blessed. So I have to have some offspring. Fact number two, God has promised me specifically, it's through Isaac that my offspring will be reckoned. Okay, fact number three, Isaac needs to have a body in order to have a child for that whole thing to keep going. He didn't have a son yet, and so he is indispensable at least until he gives birth to a son or conceives a son. Fact number four, God has commanded me to burn his body to ashes. Well then, God's going to raise his body from the dead. I think that's how he reasoned. I don't see any other way. And so right from that, he reasons. So it's amazing how much faith and reason actually do go together. All that happens with faith as faith just accept facts that the pure rationalist doesn't accept, we accept revealed facts and then we reason from them. And so he reasons, and so he obeys. He doesn't merely obey the command, I don't want to go beyond this, I want to add a different verb that we don't usually use with commands, he believed the command. Usually, we think obey the command, believe the promise. And that's fine, that's the usual way we speak. But here it seems like he goes beyond, he just embraces the command, he steps into it, he swims in the ocean of the command, he loves the command, it becomes him because God gave it. And so there is one verse that teaches this connection, Psalm 119 and Verse 66 says, "Teach me knowledge and good judgement for I believe in your commands." That's a wonderful verse, isn't it? "I believe in your commands. I trust them, they're not burdensome. I love them, whatever you command to do is right, I embrace it." So he loved that command. So what was the outcome of Abraham's faith? Well, early the next morning, he got up and saddled his donkey. There is no evidence he told Sarah anything. Can you imagine what that conversation would have looked like? I think that Abraham did in fact, imagine what that conversation would have looked like. "We're not going there, it's not her trial, this is my trial. I'm not going to lay that burden." And am I feeling the same thing with any friends or a circle of people that hold him accountable and pray for him, all of those things are beneficial, but he would have thought, "I think this is not helpful at all. All they're going to try to do is what? Talk me out of it, or they're going to confirm what I've already resolved to do by faith, so there's no point." And so he just gets up immediately the next morning, he saddles a donkey, he gets ready and makes that three-day journey. And for three days, he trusted God. And they get there, and Isaac spoke up and said to his father Abraham, "'Father.' 'Yes, my son,' Abraham replied. 'The fire and the water are here,' Isaac said, 'But where is the lamb for the burnt offering?' Abraham answered, 'God Himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering my son.' And the two of them went on together." They have that conversation, then they go up the mountain, just the two of them as I already said, "Stay here…while I and the boy go over there. We will go up and worship, we will come back to you." And then "they reached the place that God had told him about. Abraham built an altar there, arranged the wood on it. He bound his son, Isaac, and laid him on the altar on top of the wood, and then he reached out his hand and he took the knife to slay the son." Abraham's will was entirely given over to the deed. His affections were entirely committed to the deed, it was done. Luther in his devotional said, "If God had slept but a moment, Isaac would have been killed." God waited to the last possible moment. And that's just instructive for me, God isn't going to take you out of the oven until you're done. And some of these trials are going to go on a lot longer than you'll want them to go. So God goes the whole way with Abraham, and only at the last possible moment. He could have stopped him there for one day, said, "I noticed that you saddled your donkey, and you've traveled one day, won't you just turn around?" He didn't do that. Or two days, or three days or half way up the mountain, no, he goes right to the end and then He stops. The deed was done. Abraham’s Commendation by God And he obeyed and in effect, sacrificed his son, though God stopped him. And you know how God stopped him, what a marvelous moment that is in redemptive history. The angel of the Lord called out to him from Heaven, "'Abraham! Abraham!' 'Here I am,' He replied, 'Do not lay a hand on the boy,' he said, 'Do not do anything to him. Now, I know that you fear God.'" Oh the mystery of that statement, this infinite God, saying, "Now I know." You know what it means to me? He wants to see it lived out in life, then He'll say the same thing. "Now, I know that you trust me. Now I know that you fear me. Now I know that you love me. Now I know that you obey me, because you've done this." "Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me, your son, your only son." And then comes this marvelous commendation. "The angel of the Lord called to Abraham from heaven a second time and said, 'I swear by myself, declares the Lord, because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and sand on the sea shore.'" Incredible commendation, commended by faith. Without faith it's impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to Him, must believe that He exists and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him. He is commended here for his faith, as a righteous man. And the text says he received Isaac back from the dead. You got him back. You can imagine what kind of hugging and trembling went on at that moment. Got him back. And it says, he did so figuratively and figuratively speaking, he did receive Isaac back from death. I think it's just, at one level, just simply, he didn't actually kill him. And so, in some figure of sense, it goes deeper than that. I think it's pretty clear that this is a type or a symbol of Christ, His sacrifice, and His resurrection for us. "Because I live, you also live," and the whole issue here in Hebrews 11 is to get us to stop fearing death. So that we're not afraid of death anymore. We've already been told in Hebrews 2, that Christ has destroyed forever him who holds the power of death, and freed us from it. We don't need to be afraid of death. And so much of Hebrews 11 is to liberate the readers from fear of death to know you're going to reach the end of your life, and not receive the things promised, but you're going to die in faith, and be gathered to your people and then you're going to go into your inheritance, and you're going to live forever with me. Don't fear death. And so, we're taken from one death bed to the next. In the next few weeks we'll talk about that. To Isaac's death bed, Jacob's death bed, Joseph's death bed, one after the other, so that we can embrace a life totally free from fear of death. As it says in the Book of Revelation, "They did not love their lives so much as to shrink from death." You're going to live a certain kind of life if you don't fear death. You're going to die every day, like Paul says, "Brothers, I die, daily, I die all the time. I'm a kernel of wheat falling to the ground and dies. It's what I do, I die, and I die, and I die some more, so that God can work life in me." IV. The Significance for Us Today What is the significance for us today? Well, the name of the sermon I entitled it "The Second Greatest Act of Faith in History." You may want to debate with me, you may know some missionary that did some great thing, you may know some other Biblical figure. I've been through the whole Bible in my head quickly. I just can't think of any other greater example of faith ever done, except one. Now, you know what I have in mind. The question you may have is, was Jesus' obedience to his father, was His death on the cross, an act of faith? And I think it was, because in Hebrews 2:13 it says, "I will put my trust in Him," and that's Jesus speaking to the Father. Here, am "I and the children God has given me," I will put my trust in Him. And we see that kind of entrusting language. 1 Peter 2 says that, "He entrusted himself to Him who judges justly." He said, "Father, into your hands, I commit my spirit." He said that on the cross. He entrusted His death to the father though there was almost no evidence that anything had come of, looks like, three years of miraculous ministry and a group of women and one Apostle at the base of the cross, and that's it. It's like, "Alright, Father, would you do something with this? If I die, will you make it great? Yes, I will. You sit at my right hand and I will make it great." So by faith, He entrusted himself to his father in His humanness, was the greatest act of faith in history and from that, like Michael Card says, "What Abraham was asked to do, God the Father has done." He's offered his only son and through the blood of Jesus Christ, sinners like you and me can be forgiven. If you trust in Him, if you just look to Him, and look away from your good deeds, look away from your own convictions, and what a good person, you are, and you look away from all that, and you look to this one act in history, you look back 2000 years as Abraham looked ahead 2000 years, you look back to Jesus, and you realize God has provided the Lamb. He is the Lamb of God whose death takes away the sins of the world. All you need to do, as you're sitting and listen to me, is just in your heart, trust in Him. Look to Him by faith. And your sins will be forgiven. Turn away from wickedness, turn away from sin, and simply by faith, you will be forgiven of all of your sins. And secondly, if you've already done that, did it years ago, you have a faith that cannot perish, God opened it up in your soul, He has sustained it all these many years and He wants to test it, and He will test it. He's going to test your faith day after day, year after year, to show you that it's not from yourself but from Him. He's going to put you in trying and testing circumstances and by them you're going to grow, so simply expect to be tested. Don't act like it's a strange thing when you're going through a trial of faith. And thirdly, be willing to offer up your own Isaacs, whatever they are. Thomas Mann preached, a Puritan that preach a great sermon on this offering up your Isaac. What does it mean to give up your Isaac? Well, it means, don't murmur against God, when He takes a loved one out of your life. Don't murmur against God, when He takes a beloved husband or beloved wife or a beloved mom or dad or a beloved child even. Don't murmur against God, at that time. I mentioned this a few weeks ago, but I want to read what Sarah Edwards said when she found out that Jonathan, her husband, had died of a smallpox inoculation very surprisingly, wrote of it in a letter to their daughter Esther, who herself would be dead in a short amount of time. And so frankly, with Sarah, all of them, all three of them. But this is what Sarah wrote to Esther. "Oh, my very dear child. What shall I say? A holy and good God has covered us with a dark cloud. Oh, that we may all kiss the rod and lay our hands on our mouths. The Lord has done it. He has made me adore His goodness that we had Him so long, but my God lives and He has my heart. My heart didn't die when Jonathan Edwards died, God has my heart. Oh, what a legacy my husband and your Father has left us. We are all given to God, and there I am, and there I love to be." May I commend that kind of faith to you next time you go through a serious trial. Kiss the rod. Say, "Praise God that the hand that holds the rod loves you and is only doing it to train you and prepare you." What else does it mean to give up your Isaac? Well, deny yourself. Self-denial for the cause of Christ. You give up your Isaac when you're willing to turn your backs on earthly comforts and advantages for the sake of the Gospel. In a small way, when you risk ridicule at work, or at school, or in your neighborhood, to share Christ, you're giving up your Isaac. What are you giving up? Well, you're giving up a reputation is a good guy, or a fun person, or how it is they look on you. I've talked about Workplace Evangelism, as the trading in of an inconsequential temporary assessment for one good opportunity to share the Gospel. Trade it in. It's not worth much anyway. They won't sacrifice much for you, I'm telling you they won't. If they even think about you, they have their odd thoughts anyways. Trade it in, trade it in, trade it in with love by prayer, look for an opportunity, and share Christ. Trade it in. How much more, if you were willing to go overseas on a short-term mission trip, or to go to the South Durham Church Plant. Say, you know, I love First Baptist Church. I love being here, but I think God's calling on me to do something challenging, and to leave a church I love, and to go work with a new church. I think God's calling me to do that, by faith. You're also giving up your Isaac when you mortify the members of the body that are leading to lust. When Jesus said, "If your right eye cause you to sin, then gouge it out and throw it away," that's like giving up your Isaac. It's something precious, that could lead you to sin, just like Isaac could have been an idol for Abraham. It's a precious thing. Your right hand caused you to sin, then cut it off and throw it away. It's something valuable, something precious, something God gave you, but it's just leading you to sin. Give it up. Learn to reason by faith, learn to think through what you believe. Get to know the Bible better. Root everything you think on specific commands and promise in Texas scripture, and then reason from it. Let a city of truth, a whole metropolis of truth grow up inside your heart by Jesus, and by the biblical interpretation, and by reasoning, so that the world view of the Bible, just grows within you. Reason by faith. They are not enemies, they're not separate domains, not at all. That's what Stephen J Gould and other unbelievers will tell you, they're just separate domains. They have nothing to do with each other. That's not my world view. Put them together. Faith and reason, reason by faith as Abraham did, and learn the pattern of un-questioning obedience to God. God is telling you to do something, then do it. Do it. You may have some wrangling, you may have a tortured-looking face, but in the end, all that matters is, did you obey God or not? And finally, put all of your hope in your future bodily resurrection. We are decaying, we're in a decaying orbit physically, "All men are like grass and all their glories like the flower the field." Your body is wearing out. But someday you're going to have a resurrection body. Don't fear death. Look ahead to it. Look forward to it. Look forward to the resurrected body, in the resurrected world. Live for that. And don't cling the things. I'm not saying, don't do what you need to do to stay healthy and be ready to serve God do that, stay in good shape. If you need surgery, get it, if you need chemo, get it, if it will heal you. But the fact that matter is these bodies are wearing out. Use the time you have to serve Christ, and look ahead to the glorious resurrection. It's coming sooner and sooner, Amen. Close with me in prayer.
Victor Stenger is Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of Hawaii and Adjunct Professor of Philosophy at the University of Colorado. He is also founder of Colorado Citizens for Science. He's held visiting faculty positions at the University of Heidelberg in Germany, and at Oxford in the United Kingdom, and has been a visiting researcher at Rutherford Laboratory in England, the National Nuclear Physics Laboratory in Frascati, Italy, and the University of Florence in Italy. Stenger’s research career has spanned the period of great progress in elementary particle physics that ultimately led to the current standard model. He participated in experiments that helped establish the properties of strange particles, quarks, gluons, and neutrinos and has also helped pioneer the emerging fields of very high energy gamma ray and neutrino astronomy. In his last project before retiring, Vic collaborated on the experiment in Japan which showed for the first time that the neutrino has mass. He is the author of many books, including Comprehensible Cosmos, The Unconscious Quantum, Not by Design, Has Science Found God, the New York times best-seller God: The Failed Hypothesis: How Science Shows that God Does Not Exist, and The New Atheists: Standing Up for Science and Reason. In this, the first of three special-edition epsiodes featuring D.J. Grothe, Vic Stenger discusses The New Atheism, contrasting it with the old atheism, in that it is more uncompromising in its critique of religion and God-belief. He defends the view that a soft stand on religion for the sake of science education is unacceptable, because the evils resulting from religion demand a vocal response. He describes his own history as an author critical of the paranormal and how this further fueled his atheism, contending that skepticism of the paranormal may lead to skepticism of religion. He talks about Carl Sagan and Stephen J. Gould, and their reluctance to criticize theism, and argues that sometimes, contra Sagan's famous line, "absence of evidence is evidence of absence." He defends making a positive statement that God does not exist -- beyond a reasonable doubt -- as opposed to merely stating that one lacks belief in God. He wonders if authors Susan Jacoby and Jennifer Michael Hecht should also be considered New Atheists. He describes lines of positive evidence from cosmology, physics, biology and neuroscience that he says necessary leads to a conclusion of atheism. He tells why he doesn't think the battle over evolution education should take priority over the New Atheist's larger war on faith, and why rationalists should not unduly seek the support of religious moderates and religious supporters of science. And he shares his optimism about the growing popularity of vocal, uncompromising atheism, especially among young people.
Randy Olson is a marine biologist and filmmaker who holds a PhD in biology from Harvard University. A graduate of the U.S.C. Cinema School in 1997, he wrote and directed the movies Flock of Dodos: The Evolution-Intelligent Design Circus, and Sizzle: A Global Warming Comedy. His new book is Don't Be Such a Scientist: Talking Substance in an Age of Style. In this interview with D.J. Grothe, Randy Olson discusses his background as a Harvard-trained scientist and tenured professor and why he changed careers to become a filmmaker. He explains the differences between science education and science communication. He recounts the social changes, beginning in the 1980's, that have harmed science education and the communication of science to the public. He describes the ways that filmmaking is ideal for public science advocacy, and how his films, such as Flock of Dodos, have unexpectedly led to further public engagement with the scientific community. He emphasizes the role of storytelling as the means to best communicate science to the public, and describes how scientific papers are like screenplays. He talks about the Daily Show and the Colbert Report as examples of how serious issues, including scientific controversies, can be communicated to the public in entertaining and engaging ways. He talks about how Stephen J. Gould and Carl Sagan exemplified ways to avoid being "such a scientist," by arousing interest and by being likable. He addresses the stereotypes of scientists as being humorless, stuffy and too literal. He describes the reaction his book has received from the science community. He criticizes the National Academy of Sciences and the American Association for the Advancement of Science for their disinterest in science activism. He contrasts the community of scientists with other professional learned societies, such as within law or medicine. He examines the responsibility of the public to learn science even despite how effective scientists are at communicating it. And he explores the role of increasingly mainstream anti-science movements in the public's misunderstanding of climate research, evolution, and vaccinations.
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
