1. Felicific Forest
    Joined
    15 Dec '02
    Moves
    23634
    23 Jun '05 15:08
    At the moment there are a number of discussions on the Forums going on that deal with Ethics, Natural Law, Divine Law, Civil Law etc.

    Debators who are interested in these issues could be interested in the works of George Ellis Ph.D, winner of the Templeton Prize 2004.

    http://www.templetonprize.org/bios_recent.html

    “Ethics is causally effective,” he says, referring to the power that ethics has to change the world, “and provides the highest level of values that set human goals and choices.” Describing himself as a “moral realist,” Ellis argues that ethics, like mathematics, is a part of the universe that we discover rather than invent, and that there are deep ethical truths built into the physical universe.

    His work on the origin of the universe, evolution of complexity, the functioning of the human mind, and how and where they intersect with areas beyond the boundaries of science, has been covered in such books as On the Moral Nature of the Universe, written with Nancey Murphy. He believes that kenotic behavior is “deeply imbedded in the universe, both in ethics and in other aspects of our lives” and that it is the only way to achieve what might otherwise be “rationally impossible.” Self-sacrificing love, according to Ellis, is the true nature of morality, another area that he says cannot be explained with simple physics or indeed by any science.

    Beyond ethics, Ellis contends that there are many areas that cannot be accounted for by physics. Directly challenging the notion that the powers of science are limitless, Ellis notes the inability of even the most advanced physics to fully explain factors that shape the physical world, including human thoughts, emotions and social constructions such as the laws of chess. He comments that this is not a claim on behalf of vitalism: rather it is a simple statement of fact as regards present day science.

    http://www.templetonprize.org/bios_recent.html
  2. Standard memberfrogstomp
    Bruno's Ghost
    In a hot place
    Joined
    11 Sep '04
    Moves
    7707
    26 Jun '05 01:531 edit
    Originally posted by ivanhoe
    At the moment there are a number of discussions on the Forums going on that deal with Ethics, Natural Law, Divine Law, Civil Law etc.

    Debators who are interested in these issues could be interested in the works of George Ellis Ph.D, winn ...[text shortened]... nt day science.

    http://www.templetonprize.org/bios_recent.html
    that isnt his field. , so maybe since he's a physicists and that's a philosophical idea he ought not accept the prize on grounds that his scientific acheivements are in the exact field he specifies as an invalid discipline to determine such matters.

    the criteria?:
    The judges consider a nominee's contribution to progress made either during the year prior to his selection or during his or her entire career. The qualities sought in awarding the Prize are: freshness, creativity, innovation and effectiveness. Such contributions may involve new concepts of divinity, new organizations, new and effective ways of communicating God's wisdom and infinite love, creation of new schools of thought, creation of new structures of understanding the relationship of the Creator to his ongoing creation of the universe, to the physical sciences, and the life sciences, and the human sciences, the releasing of new and vital impulses into old religious structures and forms.

    Now on the other hand if he would uses mathematics to work out a field theory and normalizes his claim , he might be deserving of the Nobel Prize,,,, just don't hold your breath waiting.


    my opening statement is amplified by the fact that of freshness, creativity, innovation and effectiveness only the last might apply but thats only because of his reputation as a physicist.
  3. Standard memberfrogstomp
    Bruno's Ghost
    In a hot place
    Joined
    11 Sep '04
    Moves
    7707
    26 Jun '05 07:32
    Originally posted by ivanhoe
    At the moment there are a number of discussions on the Forums going on that deal with Ethics, Natural Law, Divine Law, Civil Law etc.

    Debators who are interested in these issues could be interested in the works of George Ellis Ph.D, winner of the Templeton Prize 2004.

    http://www.templetonprize.org/bios_recent.html

    “Ethics is causally effective,” he ...[text shortened]... ement of fact as regards present day science.

    http://www.templetonprize.org/bios_recent.html
    heres a little quote from another Physicist in Ellis' chosen field

    "I do not believe in immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it."
    ["Albert Einstein: The Human Side
  4. Felicific Forest
    Joined
    15 Dec '02
    Moves
    23634
    27 Jun '05 00:39
    Originally posted by frogstomp
    that isnt his field. , so maybe since he's a physicists and that's a philosophical idea he ought not accept the prize on grounds that his scientific acheivements are in the exact field he specifies as an invalid discipline to determine such matters.

    the criteria?:
    The judges consider a nominee's contribution to progress made eit ...[text shortened]... s only the last might apply but thats only because of his reputation as a physicist.

    I wonder on which grounds you'll dismiss that other Templeton Prize winner John Polkinghorn ?
  5. Standard memberfrogstomp
    Bruno's Ghost
    In a hot place
    Joined
    11 Sep '04
    Moves
    7707
    27 Jun '05 01:54
    Originally posted by ivanhoe

    I wonder on which grounds you'll dismiss that other Templeton Prize winner John Polkinghorn ?
    its not the guys its the concept behind the prize itself.and the misusing the credentials of scientists to further things other than science.It's almost like buying letters.
  6. Standard memberfrogstomp
    Bruno's Ghost
    In a hot place
    Joined
    11 Sep '04
    Moves
    7707
    27 Jun '05 02:06
    Originally posted by ivanhoe

    I wonder on which grounds you'll dismiss that other Templeton Prize winner John Polkinghorn ?
    Ok thats a priest that is up front and a scientist.
    so was Copernicus many others you would expect him to argue from both.
    Want to bet he doesn't reject his own field of science and then make assertions like Ellis did.

    which btw wasnt novel since Einstein had said similar things.
  7. Felicific Forest
    Joined
    15 Dec '02
    Moves
    23634
    27 Jun '05 19:141 edit
    Originally posted by frogstomp
    its not the guys its the concept behind the prize itself.and the misusing the credentials of scientists to further things other than science.It's almost like buying letters.

    Interesting
  8. Subscriberno1marauder
    Humble and Kind
    In the Gazette
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    39559
    27 Jun '05 19:19
    Describing himself as a “moral realist,” Ellis argues that ethics, like mathematics, is a part of the universe that we discover rather than invent, and that there are deep ethical truths built into the physical universe.


    Hey, that's what I'm saying in the other thread!! Where do I pick up my prize????
Back to Top