For years movies have been depicting robots with artificial intelligence. Some AI robots are depicted with human characteristics. The video below depicts "The Uncanny Valley", a spot where robot features become too close to human ones. 

1. Why do people get scared of robots that have AI with human features but like the AI robots with non-human features?
2. Do you believe this is true? 
3. Cartoon AI robots are considered "cute" but scientists strive to make AI robots that look very much like humans. Does this mean that we are trying to create them "in our image" like God created us?
4. Is this arrogant of us to believe we can recreate humans? 
5. Also do you believe that we will ever be able to have a fully automated robot that thinks and acts like a human would? 
6. What are the repercussions of this happening?

Please watch the video below that explains more about "The Uncanny Valley" and have fun discussing.

-Carrie W, Patrick C, and Chris S

Sins Against the Planet: Is Theology Responsible for the Consequences of Science?

Photo: An abandoned church in a mining town

 in Oregon that was deserted after the mine closed.

According to Lynn White in her article, “The Historical Roots of the Ecological Crisis,” the word ecology did not appear in the English language until 1873.  This was during the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, which introduced a litany of new issues and questions into society that are still being addressed today.  At the core of these issues, we must challenge the conception that humanity has sovereignty over the Earth. According to both of the class readings, theological belief may have part in humanity’s lackadaisical attitude toward the environment. While Christianity may have encouraged a dominion of humanity on Earth I don’t think it’s accurate at say, as White does that Christianity is at the helm of the ecological crisis.  I don’t deny either that there is something to the attitude of entitlement that surrounds the ecological crisis that seems latent in some aspects of religion.  As White points out, Pagan traditions were more outright considerate of the environment while Christianity seems to put the Earth completely at man’s disposal.  That said, I think it’s important to raise the following question: Is the attitude of human dominion that theological belief (consider Catholicism especially) has encouraged responsible for the ecological crisis?  To what extent has science teamed with this aspect of theological belief in its pursuit of industrial and technological advancement?  Also consider the opposite—are scientists who are searching for ways to help the environment operating under theological ideals or are they following a moral compass devoid of religious influence? Does science need some aspects of theological belief be motivated to save the planet?

The God Spot / Koren Helmet

Neurotheology: “The attempt to explain religious experience and behavior in neuroscientific terms.”

In the series “Through the Wormhole,” Morgan Freeman features a study being preformed by neurotheologists whom are attempting to explain the “correlations between neural stimulation and spiritual experience.” Called ‘The God Spot,’ neurologists believe they have specified a part of the brain that, when correctly stimulated by magnetic energy, will provide users with experiences that are comparable to the spiritual and out of body experiences usually associated with God intervention.

To research ‘The God Spot,’ Stanley Koren, a member of Laurentian University’s Neuroscience Department, created a helmet with the directions of Dr. Michael Persinger, that containing magnetic coils that are strategically aimed at the right temporal lobe. Many test subjects claim that when wearing the Koren Helmet they experienced “out-of-body feelings, apparitions floating around them, sensations of weightlessness, and many other strange phenomena.” Throughout all the testing, scientists discovered that about “80% of test subjects experienced remarkable visions and some sensed the presence of something else in the chamber.”

Now the big question is are these visions truly visions of God? The right temporal lobe, the area that the Koren Helmet stimulates, is responsible for auditory perception, processing of speech and vision, and language functions. It seems that the feelings the test subjects encountered may be false. This could be because parts of the brain related to the experiences of the test subjects are being more intensely activated. The inquiry scientists put on the table when debating this experiment is whether or not the "God-Spot" is a region of the brain that evolved so that humans can communicate with a higher power, or a simply region we developed to create a "comfort blanket" for ourselves amidst the violence that we experience in the world.

Other Questions:

What causes some of the test subjects to relate their encounters to a godly like occurrence?
 
Is ‘The God Spot’ a spot that creates the illusion of God or is it the spot that allows communication with god?

LINK TO YOUTUBE VIDEO

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y02UlkYjSi0

LINK TO ARTICLES

http://questional.com/blog/74-dr-michael-persingers-koren-helmet-the-god-experience/
http://www.darksidecollective.org/GodHelmet.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nigel-barber/the-god-spot-revisited-spirituality-as-evolved-brain-function_b_1779667.html

Evolution

Evolution vs. Creationism

Merriam-Webster Dictionary has defined the definition of evolution as:

A theory that the various types of animals and plants have their origin in other preexisting types and that the distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive generations

It also defines creationism as:

A doctrine or theory holding that matter, the various forms of life, and the world were created by God out of nothing and usually in the way described in Genesis

Charles Darwin, one of the founding fathers of evolution, explained the means of evolution in his Origin of Species.  His evolution theory is a premise on natural selection, which is based on survival of the fittest, random variations, and struggle for survival.  This finding over time has become, widely known as Social Darwinism, a major attack on Scripture.  This challenges God as the designer and the status of humanity. 

Here are the counter-arguments from non-creationists:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSxgnu3Hww8&feature=related

Creationism is based on the religious belief that there is an intellectual designer of the universe, humanity, and Earth.  The prominent group of these believers is Christian Fundamentalists, who specifically believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible.  They target against the theory of evolution.

William Paley introduced the watchmaker analogy in his Natural Theology, which stated that there is an intelligent designer.  Creationists often use this analogy to support their claims against the theory of evolution. 

Here are some questions for you guys to consider:

1.     What is your view on the controversy between evolution and creationism?

2.     Is Evolution just a theory? Does Creationist have solid evidence to argue against Evolution?

3.     Scopes Trial led to the questioning of the teaching of evolution as being part of the public school curriculum.  What is your take on this matter?  Should just evolution, creationism, or both be taught in the public school system?

4.     Earlier we’ve read John Paul II’s address on the need for a dialogue relationship between religion and science, which maintains both identity and integrity.  Do you agree with this? If not which one of Barbour’s taxonomy would you classify the two?

     Happy discussing!

     -Khulan, Riley and Ryan 

·

Scientists and Their Religious Philosophies

The world would be a different place without science and would be equally different without religion; in fact, it can be argued that humanity as we know it would not exist without either. There are many obvious examples of scientists who have either battled with the church or bolstered her ideas, and Galileo is perhaps one of the most famous. Here we explore three more scientists who have revolutionized our thoughts about how our world works and their relation to faith. Some of them are more tightly connected than we often realize!

Sir Isaac Newton’s achievements ranged across the fields of mathematics, physics, astronomy and natural philosophy. Perhaps no other scientist’s work was as important to the development of modern science as was his achievement. Newton, through his observations on gravity, limits and calculus, provided scientist with valuable tools through which to view the world and better understand its phenomena. What he described was an orderly world governed by natural laws that could be defined and understood. His three laws of motion and the universality of gravitation showed that a ball falling on the earth and a planet orbiting a star were subject to the same rules. In his tireless pursuit of an ordered explanation for the universe, Newton recognized the necessity of God’s truth. For him, God was the master craftsman who had created a world of such intricate beauty that his existence was manifest. However, he understood his laws as beginning a process that would lead to understanding all natural phenomena, and show that God was not intervening constantly in the world, but that he had set it up to work according to his laws. Newton believed God to be within the realm of comprehension of Human reason, and rejected the idea of the trinity and other religious memories. His ideas would lead to the Deist movement becoming prominent among the scientific community.

Sir Charles Darwin’s work was more closely caught up with his faith than most people realize. In his early work aboard the HMS Beagle, Darwin was looking for “centers of creation”—that is areas that he believed God had created separate species. He did, however, begin to doubt that the Bible contained literal historical truth, which became a stumbling block in his faith. He was heavily influence in his work by the problem of evil—that is, how a good God can allow evil things to happen? His predecessors like Malthus had sought to solve this problem by showing that the world was governed by immutable natural laws put in place by the creator. Thus even though these laws might cause great suffering—as in famines and starvation due to inadequate food supplies an overpopulation—eventually these laws would tend towards humanities greater good.  Darwin saw the same violence and competition in nature, and sought through evolution to show that the good of adaption was achieved without the direct involvement, and therefore complicity, of the creator. The more he studied, however, the harder he found it to reconcile a benevolent creator with the suffering he observed in nature and human society. He was especially hard hit by the death of his daughter, at which point he ceased attend church.

Albert Einstein is known for solving many of the world's previous scientific problems. He moved around throughout his early years, living in Germany, Italy, and Switzerland. Eventually he would become a citizen of the United States, but before that happened, much of his scientific work was already world-renowned. The theory of relativity is particularly well-known, I'm sure most of you can tell me that E=mc^2. He also got involved in quantum mechanics later in life. But Einstein is also known for his views and philosophy on faith. He was born into a Jewish family and left Germany before World War II because he argued with the politics of the country. Although he was Jewish and lived a good life, he did not believe in an immortal soul or free will, both of which are crucial elements of Christianity. He was, however, a pacifist and spent much time speaking out against war and he considered himself to be religious in that "The most beautiful and deepest experience a man can have is the sense of the mysterious. It is the underlying principle of religion as well as all serious endeavor in art and science. He who never had this experience seems to me, if not dead, then at least blind" ('My Credo' from a speech given in Berlin in 1932, http://www.einsteinandreligion.com/credo.html). He considered this to be the true basis of religion and therefore considered himself to be a religious person. 

All three of these scientists (including Galileo as well) made significant strides in the realms of science, religion, and to a degree philosophy. There are several questions we can ask ourselves and discuss, and we've included a list for you here.

~ Discuss some of the differences that have been made in our world thanks to these scientists' theories. How have they changed the way we live from the way things used to be?

~ Darwin's theories in particular rocked the world and the Church's way of thinking. How have the two reconciled to each other (or are they still disagreeing)?

~ If these scientists were to go out to lunch together, would they end up agreeing on matters of science and religion or growing farther apart?

~ For centuries, the Catholic Church and the Pope ruled the world just as much as the kings of France, Spain, England, etc, but by the time of Einstein, the Church had more or less fallen out of power as a monarchy of sorts and exists today as solely a religious institution. How did the scientific discoveries by these and other scientists act as a catalyst for that change? Was science what caused this or were there other factors that were more influential?

~ Lastly, has the Church grown more or less vigilant and how has that affected scientific discovery throughout the centuries, especially as these particular scientists published their discoveries?

Happy discussing!


(http://www.einsteinandreligion.com/

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aso/databank/entries/bpeins.html)


- Jade and Sam

The 'God Particle'

Can we use Science to explain God?  Scientists are claiming that they have found evidence of a sub-attomic particle that was used during the creation of the universe.  They are calling this particle the 'God Particle.'  
Here are some questions to think about:
        Can we reduce God to a particle?  
        If we could be 100% certain that this particle "is God," what would that mean for the        
                          religious community?   
        What do you think of scientists calling the newly discovered particle, 'God particle'? 
        Do you think this discovery is a step towards or away from a deeper understanding of   

                          creation?  

        What gives scientists the right to try and discover God?  

        Why does science feel the need to try and discover God?

                                              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x83gChDgRmg


~Grace, Colleen, and Remy 

When Did We Become Human?

There's an article out today on NPR with the above title. It's written by a woman who teaches Biological Anthropology and she brings up the idea that this is never an easy question to answer. And it seems that as we discover more, it becomes more difficult to answer rather than easier. Here's a link to the article for your viewing pleasure:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2012/09/11/160934187/for-how-long-have-we-been-human

Have fun!