Abstract
Over the past four decades, the interdisciplinary field of ‘theology and science’ has undergone tremendous growth involving scholars from philosophy of science, philosophy of religion, the natural sciences, theology, ethics, history and related fields.1 Topics range from comparative methodologies to the relations between theologies of creation, divine action, and redemption in light of Big Bang, inflationary and quantum cosmologies, quantum physics, evolutionary and molecular biology, the neurosciences, anthropology, sociobiology, behavioral genetics, etc. Originally the work drew primarily on Christian theology, but today representatives of many other religions are active contributors. Surprisingly underrepresented in this rapidly growing interaction, however, is a focus on the philosophical and theological issues raised by the possibility of extraterrestrial life (EL) and extraterrestrial intelligence (ETI).2 This is particularly curious since historians of science have shown th at Christian theology contributed in significant ways to the assumption that ETI does in fact exist.3 It is particularly timely, then, that this Sixth Trieste Conference on Chemical Evolution includes a section on the philosophical and theological implications of extraterrestrial intelligence.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Endnotes
For a scholarly introduction, see Ian G. Barbour, Religion in an Age of Science (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1990); Nancey Murphy, Theology in the Age of Scientific Reasoning (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1990); Arthur Peacocke, Theology for a Scientific Age: Being and Becoming (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993); John C. Polkinghorne, The Faith of a Physicist: Reflections of a Bottom-up Thinker (Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress, 1994); W. Mark Richardson and Wesley J. Wildman, eds., Religion and Science: History, Method, Dialogue (New York: Routledge, 1996). For a less technical introduction see John F. Haught, Science & Religion: From Conflict to Conversion (New York: Paulist Press, 1995); Ted Peters, ed., Science & Theology: The New Consonance (Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1998); Christopher Southgate et. al., eds., God, Humanity and the Cosmos: A Textbook in Science and Religion (Harrisburg: Trinity Press International, 1999). For a recent survey article with extensive references see my “Theology and Science: Current Issues and Future Directions” at www.ctns.org.
See Ted Peters, “Exo-Theology: Speculations on Extra-Terrestrial Life,” CTNS Bulletin 14.3(Summer 1994) (Berkeley: Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences). For a recent survey of Roman Catholic views, see Douglas A. Vakoch, “Roman Catholic Views of Extraterrestrial Intelligence: Anticipating the Future by Examining the Past,” in When SETI Succeeds: The Impact of High-Information Contact, ed Allen Tough (Bellevue, Washington: Foundation for the Future, 2000). See also Ernan McMullin, “Life and Intelligence Far from Earth: Formulating Theological Issues,” in Many Worlds: The New Universe, Extraterrestrial Life & the Theological Implications, ed. Steven Dick (Philadelphia: Templeton Foundation Press, 2000); Coyne, S. J., George V., “The Evolution of Intelligent Life on Earth and Possibly Elsewhere: Reflections from a Religious Tradition,” in Many Worlds ed. Steven Dick. For a recent survey of ethical im plications see Richard O. Randolph, Margaret S. Race and Christopher P. McKay, “Reconsidering the Theological and Ethical Implications of Extraterrestrial Life,” CTNS Bulletin 17.3(Summer 1997) (Berkeley: CTNS).
Steven J. Dick, Plurality of Worlds (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982), esp. Ch. 2.
See for example Freeman Dyson, Disturbing the Universe (New York: Harper and Row, 1979), Ch. 19; Steven J. Dick, “Extraterrestrials and Objective Knowledge,” in When SETI Succeeds ed. Allen Tough.
Stephen Jay Gould, The Flamingo’s Smile: Reflections in Natural History (New York: W. W. Norton, 1985).
Paul Davies, “Teleology Without Teleology: Purpose Through Emergent Complexity,” in Evolutionary and Molecular Biology: Scientific Perspectives on Divine Action, ed. Robert John Russell, William R. Stoeger and Francisco J. Ayala (Vatican City State; Berkeley, Calif.: Vatican Observatory Publications; CTNS, 1998).
Christian De Duve, Vital Dust: Life as a Cosmic Imperative (New York: Basic Books, 1995).
Julian Chela-Flores, “The Phenomenon of the Eukaryotic Cell,” in Evolutionary and Molecular Biology ed. Robert John Russell, et. al. Also see his paper in this volume.
Bertrand Russell, “A Free Man’s Worship,” mMysticism and Logic (London: Allen & Unwin, 1903).
Jacques Monod, Chance and Necessity, trans. Austryn Wainhouse (New York: Vintage Books, 1972).
Steven Weinberg, The First Three Minutes (New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1977), 154.
Freeman Dyson, Disturbing the Universe, 250. Dyson, Infinite in All Directions (New York: Harper and Row, 1988), 117–18.
Paul Davies, “Is the Universe Absurd?” in Science and Theology ed. Ted Peters, esp. 72–76; Davies, The Cosmic Blueprint (New York: Touchstone, 1989); Davies, “Teleology Without Teleology”; see his paper in this volume.
William R. Stoeger, “The Immanent Directionality of the Evolutionary Process, and Its Relationship to Theology,” in Evolutionary and Molecular Biology ed. by Robert John Russell et. al..
Francisco J. Ayala, “Introduction,” in Studies in the Philosophy of Biology: Reduction and Related Problems, ed. Francisco J. Ayala and Theodosius Dobzhansky (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974); Francisco J. Ayala, “Reduction in Biology: A Recent Challenge,” in Evolution at a Crossroads, ed. David J. Depew and Bruce H. Weber (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1985), 67–78; Francisco J. Ayala, “Can Progress’ Be Defined as a Biological Concept?” in Evolutionary Progress, ed. Matthew H. Nitecki (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988), 75–96.
Ernst Mayr, “How Biology Differs from the Physical Sciences,” in Evolution at a Crossroads ed by David J. Depew and Bruce H. Weber, 67–78.
Charles Birch, A Purpose for Everything (Mystic, Connecticut: Twenty-Third Publications, 1990); Charles Birch, Feelings (Sydney: University of New South Wales Press, 1995); Charles Birch, “Neo-Darwinism, Self-Organization, and Divine Action in Evolution,” in Evolutionary and Molecular Biology ed by Robert John Russell et. al..
Arguments from “t=0” in Big Bang cosmology are often used to support this view, even though the theological claim is primarily about existence per se and not temporal origins. For recent references, see Robert John Russell, “Finite Creation Without a Beginning,” in Quantum Cosmology and the Laws of Nature: Scientific Perspectives on Divine Action, ed. Robert J. Russell, Nancey C. Murphy and Chris J. Isham (Vatican City State; Berkeley, Calif: Vatican Observatory Publications; Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences, 1993).
See the extensive discussion of “the Anthropic Principle” (AP) in the literature, including Quantum Cosmology and the Laws of Nature ed. by Robert John Russell, et al.. ‘Many worlds’ scenarios via inflationary Big Bang and quantum cosmologies are often deployed to undermine the ‘fine-tuning’ argument supporting divine design in the AP.
See for example Michael Ruse, Sociobiology: Sense or Nonsense? (Dordrecht: Reidel, 1979); Michael Ruse, Darwinism Defended (Reading: Addison-Wesley, 1982); Michael Ruse, Taking Darwin Seriously (Oxford: Blackwell, 1985); Michael Ruse, “Evolutionary Theory and Christian Ethics: Are They in Harmony?” Zygon 29.1(March 1994).
Michael Ruse, “Evolutionary Ethics,” in Biology, Ethics and the Origins of Life, ed. Holmes Rolston III (Boston: Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 1995), 95, 100. As Rolston summarizes Ruse: “Ethics is not true, though it is functional. (But) ethics cannot be functional unless it is believed to be true in an objective sense, a false belief.” Holmes Rolston, ed., Biology, 8. Rolston is sharply critical of Ruse in Genes, Genesis and God (Cambridge: CUP, 1999).
See for example Ayala, “Introduction”; Ayala, “Reduction in Biology”; Ayala, “Can Progress’ Be Defined?”
Francisco J. Ayala, “Ethical Behavior as an Evolutionary Byproduct,” in Biology, ed. Holmes Rolston III, 118.
Arthur Peacocke, “Reductionism,” Zygon 11.4(December 1976); Peacocke, Creation and the World of Science (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979); Peacocke, God and the New Biology (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1986); Peacocke, Theology for a Scientific Age.
Ian_G. Barbour, Issues in Science and Religion (New York: Harper & Row, 1971); Ian G. Barbour, “Ways of Relating Science and Theology,” in Physics, Philosophy, and Theology ed by Robert J. Russell et. al., 21–48; Barbour, Religion in an age of science; Ian G. Barbour, “Five Models of God and Evolution,” in Evolutionary and Molecular Biology ed. by Robert John Russell et. al...
Murphy, “Theology in the Age of Scientific Reasoning.”; Nancey Murphy, Beyond Liberalism and Fundamentalism (Valley Forge, Pa.: Trinity Press International, 1996); Nancey Murphy, “Supervenience and the Nonreducibility of Ethics to Biology,” in Evolutionary and Molecular Biology ed. by Robert John Russell et. al.; Nancey Murphy, “Nonreductive Physicalism: Philosophical Issues,” in Whatever Happened to the Soul? ed. Warren S. Brown, Nancey Murphy and and H. Newton Malony (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998); Nancey Murphy, “Supervenience and the Downward Efficacy of the Mental: A Nonreductive Physicalist Account of Human Action,” in Neuroscience and the Person: Scientific Perspectives on Divine Action, ed by Robert John Russell et. al. (Vatican City State; Berkeley, California: Vatican Observatory Publications; Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences, 1999).
George F. Ellis, Before the Beginning: Cosmology Explained (New York: Boyars/Bowerdean, 1993); George F. Ellis, “The Theology of the Anthropic Principle,” in Quantum Cosmology and the Laws of Nature ed. by Robert J. Russell, et. al., 367–406; George F. Ellis, “Ordinary and Extraordinary Divine Action: The Nexus of Interaction,” in Chaos and Complexity: Scientific Perspectives on Divine Action, ed. Robert J. Russell, Nancey C. Murphy and Arthur R. Peacocke, Scientific Perspectives on Divine Action Series (Vatican City State; Berkeley, Calif.: Vatican Observatory Publications; Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences, 1995), 359–96; Nancey Murphy and George F. Ellis, On the Moral Nature of the Universe: Theology, Cosmology, and Ethics, (Minneapolis, Minn.: Fortress Press, 1996); George F. R. Ellis, “The Thinking Underlying the New’ scientific’ World-Views,” in Evolutionary and Molecular Biology ed. by Robert John Russell et. al.; George Ellis, “Reflections on Quantum Theory and the Macroscopic World,” in Quantum Physics: Scientific Perspectives on Divine Action, ed. Robert John Russell, Philip Clayton, et al. (2001).
Paul_C. Davies, God and the New Physics (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1983), 71.; Paul Davies, “Transformations in Spirituality and Religion,” in When SETI Succeeds ed by Allen Tough.
Meters, “Exo-Theology: Speculations on Extra-Terrestrial Life,” 1. I agree with Peters (see Note #3 above). As Peters points out (p. 2; 7), it may have been the Protestant Fundamentalist reaction to UFOs in the 1970s that gave rise to the view of Christianity that Davies critiques. See also McMullin, “Life and Intelligence Far from Earth,” 164–67.
As Peters shows, Greek atomists such as Democritus and Epicurus argued for many worlds, but Aristotle rejected their views. Thomas Aquinas sought to reconcile Aristotle with Christian tradition, defending a “one world” view for philosophical reasons. Others, such as John Buridan, Nicole Oresme, Albertus Magnus, the Jewish scholar Hasdai Crescas, and Nicholas of Cusa, favored the “many worlds” position. See Dick, Plurality of Worlds.
Peters, “Exo-Theology: Speculations on Extra-Terrestrial Life,” 4–5.
For God as continuous creator and a theological response to sociobiology see Arthur Peacocke, “Sociobiology and Its Theological Implications,” Zygon 19 (1984): 171–184; Arthur R. Peacocke, “The Incarnation of the Informing Self-Expressive Word of God,” in Religion and Science ed. by W. Mark Richardson and Wesley J. Wildman, 321–42; Arthur Peacocke, “Biology and a Theology of Evolution,” Zygon 33.1(March 1998): 695–712; Philip Hefiier, The Human Factor (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1993); Philip Hefiier, “Theological Perspectives on Morality and Human Evolution,” in Religion and Science, 401–24; Philip Hefiier, “Biocultural Evolution: A Clue to the Meaning of Nature,” in Evolutionary and Molecular Biology ed. by Robert John Russell et. al..
Reinhold Niebuhr, The Nature and Destiny of Man: I (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1941 (1964)), VI–X.
Tarter claims that ET’s longevity is inconsistent with them having “organized monotheistic religions” since they are the cause of warfare on earth. Clearly sustained warfare is inconsistent with cultural longevity, but her suggestion of a causal relation between monotheism and warfare would be hard to defend critically. Of course religion is often used as an excuse for violence, but the real question is why humans are capable of such violence. It also seems odd that she speculates favorably about a “universal religion” having a “highly established code of ethics” centered on “the perpetuation of individuals” when these tenets are found in the monotheisms which she rejects. (Jill Tarter, “Implications of Contact with ETI Far Older Than Humankind,” in When SETI Succeeds ed. by Allen Touch.)
For references, see Peters, “Exo-Theology: Speculations on Extra-Terrestrial Life,” 5–6. See also Eric L. Mascall, Christian Theology and Natural Science (New York: Longmans, Green & Co., 1956), 36–45; McMullin, “Life and Intelligence,” 171–73. Coyne, in “The Evolution of Intelligent Life,” leaves the question open. In order to pursue this systematically, one would need to consider a variety of theological issues. Though I agree with Davies that the discovery of EL/ETI will bring a profound transformation in “spirituality and religion”, Christological suggestions in the literature do not seem to have what Davies caricatures as “an air of absurd theatricality” or constitute a Catholic “heresy”. (See Davies, “Transformations”) McMullin views the arguments by Davies seem “simplistic” (p. 172).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2001 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this paper
Cite this paper
Russell, R.J. (2001). Life in the Universe: Philosophical and Theological Issues. In: Chela-Flores, J., Owen, T., Raulin, F. (eds) First Steps in the Origin of Life in the Universe. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1017-7_64
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1017-7_64
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-3883-6
Online ISBN: 978-94-010-1017-7
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive