Books

Faith Across the Multiverse, Parables from Modern Science- Part 3, The Language of Biology, Chapters 9 Redeemable Ant-Man By Andy Walsh

Religion Throughout the Multiverse: Parables from Trendy Science

Half three, The Language of Biology, Chapter 9 Redeemable Ant-Man

By Andy Walsh

We’re running a blog via the e-book, “Religion Throughout the Multiverse, Parables from Trendy Science” by Andy Walsh.  At present is Chapter 9: Redeemable Ant-man and Walsh goes into an in depth regale of ant colony lore.  Which isn’t uninteresting.  Should you’ve ever seen footage of the outcomes of pouring molten aluminum into an ant hill; you already know that it exhibits the proportionate equal to a metropolis with a posh community of interconnected tunnels and chambers.

Molten Aluminum Poured into Ant Hill

Ants are farmers; they domesticate fungus that has truly turn into domesticated to the ant colony.  Ants hold livestock corresponding to aphids and “milk” them for his or her secretions.  They even defend the “herd” from different predators like shepherds defending their sheep.  Some ant species interact in warfare with different ant colonies in territorial disputes.  How are all of those complicated duties organized?  The place are the blueprints for the colony’s nest?  The place is the information of farming methods maintained?  You would argue it’s encoded of their genes, however that may solely be true in probably the most summary sense.  Does it make sense to maybe speak concerning the ant colony as a collective unit having some notion of a will that directs nest constructing, fungus farming, aphid herding, warfare, and so forth?  Is it believable that such a will might be constructed from the underside up, out of the person contributions of the ants?  And if that’s the case, are the ants free in any sense or do they blindly serve the desire of the colony.  Is all this info suggestive of a state of affairs the place a person can function individually, and but additionally understand some type of collective will?  Walsh says:

Despite the fact that we’re used to considering of ourselves as indivisible wholes, we’re a confederation of trillions of cells, many, however not all, of whom share a genome, who’ve gathered collectively to be “me” for some time…  Some organizing precept I determine as myself persists and holds all of them collectively, but with out an apparent hierarchy.  There isn’t a “me” cell that may declare superiority, or perhaps a first amongst equal standing…  All the cells are depending on the others indirectly.  All cells ship alerts, and all cells reply to alerts despatched by different cells.  The place do “I” reside?  We intuit that we reside inside our heads, searching by way of our eyes, however one thing about that image doesn’t absolutely resonate with trendy biology…

… One can simply tumble down a rabbit gap reflecting on issues of thoughts.  You begin to consider the way you assume, then you definitely understand you’re fascinated by considering, and earlier than lengthy you’ve obtained your self tied up in knots questioning who watches the watcher-watching watchers.  Simply “who” is doing all this considering, and is that the identical individual additionally desirous about my considering, and so forth and so forth…

And so Walsh takes on the query of consciousness and the character of the ‘soul”.  Is it simply physicality and neurological impulses?  We now have no empirical proof of consciousness with no bodily dwelling mind.  The Bible makes many references to at least one’s soul, and comparable concepts could be present in quite a lot of different cultural and non secular contexts.  It’s expressly not a scientific idea, since science, by definition, offers solely with the bodily.

The mannequin of id that makes probably the most sense to Walsh is the concept our thoughts or consciousness is an emergent degree of group of (at the very least) our brains.  Or to place it one other approach, our thoughts is absolutely mediated by our brains, however not strictly reducible to the mind.  He brings up the writings of Douglas Hofstadter and his ebook, I’m a Unusual Loop.  Walsh says the analogy behind that title is that our thoughts is a type of unusual attractor, like he mentioned in Chapter three.

I’d wish to deliver up some factors we mentioned in our evaluate of Minds, Brains, Souls, and Gods by Malcom Jeeves.  Malcolm mentions the InterVarsity Press e-book, “In Search of the Soul: 4 Views of the Thoughts-Physique Drawback”.  and says this:

Personally, I discover probably the most convincing strategy on this quantity, within the sense of doing most justice each to the science and to Scripture, to be the one written by Nancey Murphy.  She labels her view “Nonreductive Physicalism”.  If we should have labels placed on us, I choose to name my view dual-aspect monism, as I’ve talked about earlier than.  By this I imply that there’s just one actuality to be understood and defined – that is what I might name the “mind-brain unity”, therefore the phrase monism.  By saying “dual-aspect”, I’m affirming that with a purpose to do full justice to the character of this actuality we have to give a minimum of two accounts of it an account when it comes to its bodily make-up and an account when it comes to our psychological or cognitive talents.  You can’t scale back the one to the opposite.  This will look like a linguistic quibble, however my concern is that the time period physicalism as Nancey Murphy makes use of it, could possibly be taken by some as giving priority to the bodily facet of our make-up over the psychological.  I feel that might be to disregard that, as I stated earlier, we will solely know and speak concerning the mind-body drawback through the use of language and the psychological classes it employs.  So on this sense at the least, not choosing out both the psychological or the bodily would keep away from giving priority to both.  If pressed, I might say that referring solely to the bodily, as in Nonreductive Physicalism, runs the danger of seeming to endorse a materialistic view which, in flip, implies that the thoughts is “nothing however” the chattering of the cells of the mind.

I made the next analogy: flowing water, in a river or channel might exhibit subcritical or supercritical stream. Subcritical happens when the precise water depth is bigger than important depth. Subcritical move is dominated by gravitational forces and behaves in a sluggish or secure method. It’s outlined as having a Froude quantity lower than one (The Froude quantity is a ratio of inertial and gravitational forces. · Gravity (numerator) – strikes water downhill. · Inertia (denominator) – displays its willingness to take action). Supercritical move is dominated by inertial forces and behaves as speedy, turbulent, or unstable stream. Subcritical circulate is laminar and is outlined by comparatively easy mathematical formulation. The relation between subcritical and supercritical movement isn’t a continuum. When the Froude quantity reaches 1, a nick level happens the place the stream jumps to supercritical. The stream is now chaotic and indeterminate.

My principle is that there’s a Mind-Froude variety of 1.  Our evolutionary mind improvement reached a “nick level” with regard to cause, self-awareness, capability to consider the previous and the longer term, conceive of God, and so forth. It’s not that our fellow animal kin haven’t any capability to do this stuff, however that their improvement is of a rudimentary variety that’s under the “Mind-Froude” variety of 1 i.e. sub-critical. As commenter Robert F stated throughout that dialogue: “…a big sufficient magnitude of fabric cause-and-effect cascades right into a qualitative change.”  Our thoughts/mind reached supercritical movement; we at the moment are “within the picture of God”.  We will understand and expertise Him and mirror His actuality.  We will perceive His communication to us and we will reply—briefly we may be in a relationship with Him, as He meant.

What’s it of us that survives dying?  The empiricist would say nothing, and I’ve no empirical knowledge to dispute that.  All I’ve is, like Paul, a belief in Christ, that the place He’s there I shall be till the top when I’m given the resurrection physique.   The basic passage on the resurrection is 1 Corinthians 15:

35 However some man will say, How are the lifeless raised up? and with what physique do they arrive?

36 Thou idiot, that which thou sowest is just not quickened, besides it die:

37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that physique that shall be, however naked grain, it might probability of wheat, or of another grain:

38 However God giveth it a physique because it hath happy him, and to each seed his personal physique.

39 All flesh just isn’t the identical flesh: however there’s one type of flesh of males, one other flesh of beasts, one other of fishes, and one other of birds.

40 There are additionally celestial our bodies, and our bodies terrestrial: however the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is one other.

41 There’s one glory of the solar, and one other glory of the moon, and one other glory of the celebs: for one star differeth from one other star in glory.

42 So is also the resurrection of the lifeless. It’s sown in corruption; it’s raised in incorruption:

43 It’s sown in dishonour; it’s raised in glory: it’s sown in weak spot; it’s raised in energy:

44 It’s sown a pure physique; it’s raised a religious physique. There’s a pure physique, and there’s a religious physique.

45 And so it’s written, The primary man Adam was made a dwelling soul; the final Adam was made a quickening spirit.

46 Howbeit that was not first which is religious, however that which is pure; and afterward that which is religious.

47 The primary man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven.

48 As is the earthy, such are additionally they which are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are additionally they which might be heavenly.

49 And as we now have borne the picture of the earthy, we will additionally bear the picture of the heavenly.

So I agree with Malcolm Jeeves right here, a soul is one thing we’re, not an immaterial one thing we’ve.  We’re embodied beings.  That’s the reason the New Testomony emphasis was on resurrection of the physique, not dying and going to fluffy white cloud heaven as a disembodied “soul”.  As Chaplain Mike stated in a earlier publish:

We search for the redemption of the physique, not launch from it. Our hope is just not within the immortality of the soul, however the resurrection of the physique. Our hope, our house is just not in heaven “up there” or “on the market.” We search for all creation to be let loose from its bondage in order that we might all share collectively within the freedom of a brand new heavens and earth.

Seems like one thing to hope for.

 

 

About the author

Admin