"Thinking faith" , science and religion, and Richard Feynman

"Thinking faith" is an online journal, published by the British Jesuits. It has no regular publication date, new articles being published as and when. You can subscribe to an e-mail alert when each new article is posted.

A recently posted article is entitled "Astronomy, God and the Search for Elegance" and is written by Guy Consolmagno, a Jesuit member of the Vatican Observatory. It is in some ways a disappointing article and left me wondering at the end what particular point, if any, it was trying to make. Nevertheless, there are one or two paragraphs that are worth noting.

"Yet those who would put up a watertight barrier between science and religion miss a very important point. Science and religion do intersect without doubt in at least one point: in the human being who is the scientist, in the human being whose ultimate motivations and yearnings are, overtly or not, religious."

I suspect that there are many scientists (Richard Feynman included) who would vigorously deny any religious motivation to their love of science; Consolmagno seems to suggest that, to adapt a Rahnerian phrase, they are "anonymously religious". This seems an overly optimistic view to take of atheism! However, I do think the paragraph raises an interesting question: Can a case be made that the scientific enterprise is a manifestation of the essentially religious nature of the human person and of human society? Some detailed phenomenology of human society and of science is needed to answer that one!

Towards the end of his article, Consolmagno offers some thoughts akin to Richard Feynman's observations on the mathematical nature of physical laws:

"Not only is the Universe good, and beautiful; so are the laws that control it and explain it....The equations that describe the colours of a sunrise are remarkable for being, in their own way, every bit as beautiful as the sunrise themselves."

It is possible to be rather fussy over whether or not the "laws" control the universe or the universe is controlled in accordance with those "laws", and the scientists knowledge of the "laws" represents his knowledge of the universe (if you know what I mean). Consolmagno appears looser in his use of language in this regard than Feynman would be. Like Feynman, Consolmagno recognises that science always has something more to learn, describing this as "the key and the essence of true science".

I do take rather more substantial issue with the following passage from Consolmagno's article (my emphases):

"Think of a pendulum, a weight on a swing, moving slowly back and forth. If you’re Aristotle, you see that eventually it comes to rest, hanging straight up and down, and you conclude that all things in nature seek a natural resting place. If you’re Galileo, you notice that the period of the pendulum stays constant, even as it swings less and less. If you’re Newton, you see that there are outside forces, friction in the string or in the air, that slow down the pendulum; without those external forces, there’d be nothing to stop the pendulum from swinging forever. Same pendulum: three completely different interpretations.

"Does that mean that science is not objectively true? Well... yes, to some degree. Does it mean that science is invalid? Absolutely not. For one thing, it works — if not perfectly, then good enough."

Yes, there are three different "interpretations" or understandings of the underlying physical laws; but there are also three different sets of experimental observations, each one progressing more deeply into what can be observed about a pendulum. Each set of observations enables a different and deepening understanding of the underlying physical law. It seems unfair to me to allocate the different "interpretations" to the people associated with them rather than to allocate it to reflection on the different experimental observations, that is, to consideration of the reality being studied. The suggestion that science is not objectively true then simply does not arise. Consolmagno seems to hint at this connection between the science and the reality that it studies when he uses the phrase "For one thing, it works" and continues to exemplify this in describing the working of a clock.

"And most beautiful of all is that we have been given, undeserved, the ability to understand those laws ....Another, most surprising aid we get, and the compass that directs our intuition, is this yearning for truth, for beauty, for elegance, that directs our souls and needs to be nourished in every aspect of our human lives."

Miscellaneous thoughts on social cohesion

The April 2008 issue of New City carries a report from Kenya. This report gives an idea of how Catholic bishops and other religious leaders responded to the recent violence in their country. Seeing only the news reports outside the country, it was very easy for us to miss the way in which these tragic events represented a challenge to the ordinary people of Kenya.

"Belonging to a certain ethnic group is an inherent part of individual and cultural identity and, in itself, is not wrong. But on more than one occasion, historic and political events have warped feelings of belonging, creating myths and generating fear and mistrust between ethnic groups. These days Kenya has been posing a true challenge to its citizens... As the bishops of Kenya stated in their letter signed on 2 January: 'We have lived together for all these years as brothers and sisters. There is therefore no reason for us to raise our hand against our neighbour because he or she belongs to a different ethnic group or political affiliation. We appeal specifically to the political leaders ... to reach out to one another through dialogue in order to seek a solution to the present situation.'... In addition to the Catholic bishops, leaders of different Christian denominations and other religions have called all peoples to peace, organising moments of prayer throughout the country and encouraging solidarity above-all with those who suffer."

The report goes on to describe national prayers for peace being broadcast on radio and television, and Sunday Masses attended by far larger congregations than normal. It ends with a short account of a young father who, having discovered a group in his own neighbourhood who were planning to burn down a house in revenge, intervened with those involved and succeeded in preventing this atrocity.

What the report highlighted for me was the fact that, within a a situation of conflict based on national political events and a situation that was often reported in the media in these terms alone, there remained a moral challenge for individuals in their own neighbourhoods. Certainly, the national situation fuelled events at the neighbourhood level and so it was quite necessary to appeal for reconciliation at the national level, but at the same time responses were needed - and achieved - by people acting in their own neighbourhoods to resist violence. Sadly, in many neighbourhoods, it was the violence that held sway; but, as the New City report concludes, the positive episodes help us to believe that a better future can be achieved.

Since the events in Kenya, Tibet has seen violent protests against its Chinese rulers. An aspect of the protests in Tibet that I found most disturbing was the way in which some members of the ethnically Tibetan population appear to have targeted the local Chinese population, people who must in a real sense be their ordinary, every day neighbours. The news coverage that I saw suggested that, not only were Chinese businesses attacked, but invidual Chinese people were themselves subjected to brutality. In this context, I did not feel that an unqualified support for the Tibetan demonstrators was an appropriate response of Western governments. Again, there is an interplay between the national/international political situation and the local, neighbourhood one - but the same challenge to "love your neighbour" must surely still apply.

This may seem a long way from life in the UK, but it is perhaps not as far distant as might appear. Showing care for the neighbour who is different than yourself can take very simple forms, which nevertheless help to build trust. One of my ways of trying to do this is to give way to drivers of different ethnicity than myself on the roads (not trivial, when traffic queues up quite a long way on my road during rush hours!). I am sure there are other simple ways of trying to do this, too.

A meme I was tagged for

If you are reading this and want to be tagged, please consider yourself tagged!

What was I doing 10 years ago?
Teaching physics at a sixth form college.
(Eleven years ago was a bit more interesting - I was a parliamentary candidate in the 1997 General Election that brought new Labour to power - now that was an interesting exercise!)

Five things on my to do list today?
Mark my year 13 books.
Mark my year 12 books.
Meeting with a headteacher at a school.
Meeting between union representatives and the local authority.
Remember to bring home a metre rule and some string from school tomorrow (to measure up my living room and hall way - awkward shape, hence the string - for new carpets)

Snacks I enjoy

1. Mars bar
2. Biscuits
3. Parkin - the one cake I do bake myself
4. Mars bar (full size)
5. Mars bar (King size)

Things I would do if I were a billionaire
I don't think that what I would do and what I should do would be the same ...
I could see myself putting the money in the bank, so I could live off the interest, and then doing what I wanted ... perhaps finishing off the PhD I started ....

Five jobs that I have done
Teaching
(and as a student) ...
hop picking
mushroom farming
Christmas post
assisting in a book shop
a month of engineering training at the Royal School of Military Engineering, Chatham

Three of my bad habits
leaving things to the last minute
staying up late when I don't need to
I haven't written a letter in years

Five places I have lived
Bangkok
Kerkrade
Chester
Fleetwood
Streatham Hill

Eucharistic Adoration: Friday 4th April 2008

Once again, a "first Friday" has rather crept up on me! The icon shown on the poster for this month is one of the icons on the "Ark of the New Covenant" designed for the International Eucharistic Congress in Quebec later this year.

With the children, I intend doing a kind of liturgy of light, with a reading from part of the Exultet. This will be followed by an "action prayer" in which I will ask the children to come up and light a votive candle from the Easter candle, and place it before the altar. I also want to talk to them about genuflecting, and get them to practise this again. This will tie in with suggesting that the Body of Christ present in the Eucharist is the Body of the same Lord who rose from the dead.

With the "grown ups", I plan to use some parts of Pope Benedict's Easter Vigil homily - "turning towards the Lord" will be a very good motif for introducing the Holy Hour. I am also going to try to use a theme suggested in the catechetical materials from the Eucharistic Congress. This is an idea of the "three bodies" of Christ: the corporal body that rose from the dead, the Eucharist as the Body of Christ and the Church as the Body of Christ.

Another Easter Candle (and the Cabinet War Rooms)

Two of us spent a day out in London today (Saturday). We started at St James's Church, Spanish Place for Mass and Confession. A result of the latter is that I now have to keep to my side of an "if you go to confession, I'll go to the dentist" deal. So I have an appointment to make on Monday ... If I remember correctly, St James's began life as an embassy chapel at a time when Catholicism in England was "underground". The sanctuary was beautifully decorated for the Easter Octave. The Easter Candle is shown alongside. Every Saturday, there is Mass at 10 am followed by Confessions - this IS a plug, if any one is on pilgrimage to the shops in nearby Oxford Street on a Saturday.

We then went on to visit the Cabinet War Rooms and the Churchill Museum, just off St James's Park. This is the underground shelter or bunker, very near to Downing Street, where the War Cabinet (the core Government ministers responsible for maintaining Government during World War II) met. The visit to the Cabinet War Rooms has an audioguide, where you press codes to hear the commentary at each point during the visit. At the cabinet room itself, you can listen to a reconstruction of an argument between Winston Churchill and his military commanders about a scheme to send a raid to Trondheim in Norway (Churchill wanted it, the military didn't, and the latter carried the day). At another point you can listen to extracts from the diary of the senior officer in charge of home defence at a time during the War when an invasion of England by the Germans was expected at any day. "Perhaps the Germans will invade tomorrow" gives an impression of how imminent invasion was thought to be, with a rather relieved "Perhaps the Germans will not attempt it" as the last extract given. In modern parlance, Churchill's management style would be described as "very hands on" (ie interfering in all the details). It is a very interesting visit, though I expect that it will be quite crowded during the main summer tourist season - even today, many of the visitors were overseas tourists.

Richard Feynman: part 3 1/2

Mike Gottlieb's comment on Richard Feynman Part 3set me pondering last night. My pondering came up with two things, so here they are. I feel that they do link up to each other.



First Thing

I included in Part 3 the following quotation from the end of chapter 5 of Feynman's The Character of Physical Law. I left on one side what the quotation might tell us about Feynman's views on religion.

Which end is nearer to God; if I may use a religious metaphor. Beauty and hope, or the fundamental laws? I think that the right way, of course, is to say that what we have to look at is the whole structural interconnection of the thing; and that all the sciences, and not just the sciences, but all the efforts of intellectual kinds, are an endeavour to see the connections of the hierarchies, to connect beauty to history, to connect history to man's psychology, man's psychology to the working of the brain, the brain to the neural impulse, the neural impulse to the chemistry, and so forth, up and down, both ways...And I do not think either end is nearer to God... to stand with evil and beauty and hope, or to stand with the fundamental laws, hoping that way to get a deep understanding of the whole world, with that aspect alone, is a mistake. "

Qn 1: What can we infer from this about Feynman's own religious beliefs? Ans: As Mike Gottlieb pointed out in his comment, Feynman refers to God as a "metaphor" so indicating that he does not believe in the existence of God, and this .

Qn 2: What can we infer about Feynman's attitude towards religious belief and towards those who hold religious beliefs? Ans: To be fair to Feynman, we can only be very tentative in answering this question, and should recognise that Feynman was not in this context talking to believers specifically. But in a dialogue with people of faith, a non-believer would recognise that, though he does not believe God exists at all, those he is talking to do believe that God exists as an objective reality - and not just as a "metaphor". Does the use of the term "metaphor" indicate a discourtesy towards believers?

Qn 3 (and, for me, the most perplexing question): In this passage, what exactly does Feynman use the metaphor of God to represent? Ans: A "deep understanding of the whole world", a complete understanding of the whole world? ....



Second Thing

In Richard Feynman Part 2, I included the following quote, taken from the end of chapter 1 of The Character of Physical Law, where Feynman is summarising the features of physical laws. I added my own observation that I thought the word inexact had been well chosen. It did not indicate that the laws are wrong or incorrect, rather that they are open to and need the greater precision that comes with the furtherance of scientific knowledge.

"First, it is mathematical in its expression; the others are that way too. Second, it is not exact; Einstein had to modify it, and we know it is not quite right yet, because we have still to put the quantum theory in. That is the same with all our other laws - they are not exact. There is always an edge of mystery, always a place where we have some fiddling around to do yet. This may or may not be a property of Nature, but it certainly is common to all laws as we know them today. It may be only a lack of knowledge."

It is in this context that I think we need to read Feynman's comment that "science is uncertain" as it occurs in chapter 3 of The Character of Physical Law:

"..the only utility of science is to go on and try to make guesses. So what we always do is to stick our necks out ... Of course this means that science is uncertain; the moment that you make a proposition about a region of experience that you have not directly seen then you must be uncertain... In order to avoid simply describing experiments that have been done, we have to propose laws beyond their observed range. There is nothing wrong with that, despite the fact that it makes science uncertain."

Qn 1:

Does Feynman suggest that physical laws are "inexact" or that they are "uncertain"; or does his use of the term "uncertain" equate to his use of the term "inexact"? Ans: I am willing to interpret "uncertain" here as equivalent of "inexact". Experimental observation is capable of turning the "uncertain" guess into a confirmation or otherwise of the validity of a physical law in a new region of experience, thus exploring its field of inexactitude. I also think it would be incorrect to take away from these passages a view that "all science is uncertain". It would be more correct to take away a view that some points of scientific knowledge are known with greater certainty/exactitude than others. This is primarily based on reading the two passages in the context of each other.

In other writings, Feynman seems to favour more what would be termed in every day language "uncertainty" than what would be termed "inexactitude". This is what I intend to look at in part 4 of this series, but here is a taster. It is from an essay The Value of Science which is the last chapter of Feynman's What do you care what other people think?.

"The scientist has a lot of experience with ignorance and doubt and uncertainty, and this experience is of very great importance, I think. When a scientist doesn't know the answer to a problem, he is ignorant. When he has a hunch as to what the result is, he is uncertain. And when he is pretty darn sure of what the result is going to be, he is still in some doubt. We have found it of paramount importance that in order to progress we must recognise our ignorance and leave room for doubt. Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty - some unsure, some nearly sure, but none absolutely certain."

Qn 2:

Does this last passage say something different than the original quotation from The Character of Physical Law or does it say the same thing but using a different terminology? Ans: My view is that this last passage does represent a view that is less confident in the ability of the scientist to know the physical laws that nature manifests than the first. This is particularly so if we look at my First Thing Qn 3 above, which is suggesting/implying that The Character of Physical Law expresses a greater practical confidence in the knowledge gained by science.

Qn 3 (and, again, the most significant question): What does this all tell us about Feynman's view as to whether or not scientists' can really know the physical laws of nature? Ans: A full answer will have to wait until part 4, but herewith two indicators. Does Feynman's approach to the knowledge of nature prepare the ground for his atheism? Someone who considers science, which studies a nature that can be directly experienced, to be uncertain, is unlikely to be disposed to believe in God, of whom we have by and large only indirect experience. The second thing to bear in mind is that the thought expressed in The Character of Physical Law dates from 1964, while that from The Value of Science dates from a public address given in 1955, with a similar presentation in lectures given in 1963 (The Meaning of it all). There is a hermeneutical enquiry to be pursued here, both looking at the sequence in which Feynman's views were expressed and the context of the types of lectures involved. Or it might just be that The Character of Physical Law is atypical of Feynman's thought as a whole. See part 4!

Why do I stay in my trade union?

A comment has prompted me to provide an answer to this question.

1. Of their nature, trade unions contain a range of different views. This is because they are "political" organisations (with a small "p"). After the various political activities involved, a trade union might well adopt a particular policy position. However, that does not mean that everyone in the union supports the policy, and the politics involved bear witness to that. So just because I am a member of a certain union, it does not follow that I support every single one of its policy positions, and people do not/should not assume that.

2. Politics has aspects of collaboration with others of different views, and of trying to achieve what might be possible in imperfect circumstances. Many decisions about particular courses of action are primarily political - in other words, about what is the best way of a gaining a particular outcome. The outcome being sought might well derive from other principles, but one might well keep a low profile on one issue while you are working behind the scenes on another. Staying involved gives the opportunity to influence.

3. There do come points where one needs to make a stand. I, for example, resigned from the Executive Committee of my union when they adopted a policy paper on equality for LGBT staff and pupils in all educational settings, including pre-school settings. I did a news release that got some limited coverage in the Catholic press at the time. In various discussions with the then President and a newly appointed General Secretary, no-one could be under any illusions about my position. Three or four years later, at our recent annual conference, people still very clearly remembered the reason for my resignation. However, one can make a stand through writing letters to the union magazine, the General Secretary etc. This is what I now do.

4. About half of my work as a Branch Secretary is supporting or advising members with regard to their working lives. I see this as very much a part of my lay apostolate in the Church - using my professional expertise to work for justice for colleagues. My experience of casework is such that I would not now dream of being in a work place without access to the support of union membership.

5. Another, more general, view of things is to see union membership (and engagement with the union's processes) as part of dialogue between Christian faith and the world. Dialogue does need engagement, and membership allows that. At our recent conference I had an encouraging number of conversations with other Christian delegates.

On a more personal note, my mother was a trade union branch official in her youth. This was prompted by her membership of Young Christian Workers. So it never occurred to me to do anything else except join a union when I started work. What I do find amazing at school is just how unaware pupils are of trade unions and the work that they do.