Decoding divinity, or what the great intellectuals of our time have to say about science and spirituality.
The speakers, in order of appearance:
1. Lawrence Krauss, World-Renowned Physicist
2. Robert Coleman Richardson, Nobel Laureate in Physics
3. Richard Feynman, World-Renowned Physicist, Nobel Laureate in Physics
4. Simon Blackburn, Cambridge Professor of Philosophy
5. Colin Blakemore, World-Renowned Oxford Professor of Neuroscience
6. Steven Pinker, World-Renowned Harvard Professor of Psychology
7. Alan Guth, World-Renowned MIT Professor of Physics
8. Noam Chomsky, World-Renowned MIT Professor of Linguistics
9. Nicolaas Bloembergen, Nobel Laureate in Physics
10. Peter Atkins, World-Renowned Oxford Professor of Chemistry
11. Oliver Sacks, World-Renowned Neurologist, Columbia University
12. Lord Martin Rees, Astronomer Royal
13. Sir John Gurdon, Pioneering Developmental Biologist, Cambridge
14. Sir Bertrand Russell, World-Renowned Philosopher, Nobel Laureate
15. Stephen Hawking, World-Renowned Cambridge Theoretical Physicist
16. Riccardo Giacconi, Nobel Laureate in Physics
17. Ned Block, NYU Professor of Philosophy
18. Gerard ‘t Hooft, Nobel Laureate in Physics
19. Marcus du Sautoy, Oxford Professor of Mathematics
20. James Watson, Co-discoverer of DNA, Nobel Laureate
21. Colin McGinn, Professor of Philosophy, Miami University
22. Sir Patrick Bateson, Cambridge Professor of Ethology
23. Sir David Attenborough, World-Renowned Broadcaster and Naturalist
24. Martinus Veltman, Nobel Laureate in Physics
25. Pascal Boyer, Professor of Anthropology
26. Partha Dasgupta, Cambridge Professor of Economics
27. AC Grayling, Birkbeck Professor of Philosophy
28. Ivar Giaever, Nobel Laureate in Physics
29. John Searle, Berkeley Professor of Philosophy
30. Brian Cox, Particle Physicist (Large Hadron Collider, CERN)
31. Herbert Kroemer, Nobel Laureate in Physics
32. Rebecca Goldstein, Professor of Philosophy
33. Michael Tooley, Professor of Philosophy, Colorado
34. Sir Harold Kroto, Nobel Laureate in Chemistry
35. Leonard Susskind, Stanford Professor of Theoretical Physics
36. Quentin Skinner, Professor of History (Cambridge)
37. Theodor W. Hänsch, Nobel Laureate in Physics
38. Mark Balaguer, CSU Professor of Philosophy
39. Richard Ernst, Nobel Laureate in Chemistry
40. Alan Macfarlane, Cambridge Professor of Anthropology
41. Professor Neil deGrasse Tyson, Princeton Research Scientist
42. Douglas Osheroff, Nobel Laureate in Physics
43. Hubert Dreyfus, Berkeley Professor of Philosophy
44. Lord Colin Renfrew, World-Renowned Archaeologist, Cambridge
45. Carl Sagan, World-Renowned Astronomer
46. Peter Singer, World-Renowned Bioethicist, Princeton
47. Rudolph Marcus, Nobel Laureate in Chemistry
48. Robert Foley, Cambridge Professor of Human Evolution
49. Daniel Dennett, Tufts Professor of Philosophy
50. Steven Weinberg, Nobel Laureate in Physics
(Via Brain Pickings.)
3 comments:
A few points -
1. The mere fact that many of these people says there is "no evidence" for God shows their insincerity. There is plenty of evidence for God - they just reject it. Declaring "no" evidence just shows their ignorance of what the term "evidence" means.
2. One of the prime evidences of God just is simply the inability of physicalism to account for the notions of "self" and "will". To insist on physical causes for everything requires that absolutely everything must happen as a result of "random chance" or "necessity". Even things such as the scheduling of future events and abstract thought.
As a thought experiment I can tell you that tomorrow at 1 PM, I will rattle off a 500 character sequence of english letters. A simple exploration of the probability space for that event ( including the number of symbols, the time scheduled, and the actual sequence uttered ) gives a great amount of evidence that that event is not the result of randomness or necessity. It is quite simple to show that the observable evidence is against physicalism and not for it.
3. I have never met a single scientist who decides that the world is purely physical, and then does not exempt himself from that by claiming that he himself makes rational choices. ( Any thinking of what it means to make a "rational" or "reasoned" choice clearly shows that it is not consistent with a purely physical universe.)
4. Many of these people do not consider the full implications of their beliefs.
Finally,
Any of them that are currently living, I would be more than happy to debate on this subject
What's the point of making a film like this? So, 50 people with same bias were interviewed. The editor selected quotes she/he liked and then strung them together. Debate would have been interesting to watch. Opposing viewpoints by other emminent scholars. This film is smug. It reveals a sadly closeminded propagandist author. It is thereby it a useless waste of time....
-Victor K.
All have it wrong!
The first wholly new interpretation for two thousand years of the moral teachings of Christ is spreading on the web.
Radically different from anything else known to history, this new 'claim' is predicated upon a precise and predefined experience, a direct individual intervention into the natural world by omnipotent power to confirm divine will. "correcting human nature by a change in natural law, altering biology, consciousness and human ethical perception beyond all natural evolutionary boundaries." Like it of no, a new religious claim testable by faith, meeting all Enlightenment criteria now exists. A revolution in our conception of God is under way! More info at http://soulgineering.com/2011/05/22/the-final-freedoms/
Post a Comment