User blogs

JOSEPH MURRAY – NOBEL LAUREATE IN MEDICINE AND PHYSIOLOGY

Nobel Prize: Joseph E. Murray (born 1919) was granted the 1990 Nobel Prize in Medicine and Physiology for work that “proved to a doubting world that it was possible to transplant organs to save the lives of dying patients.” Murray was the first to perform kidney transplants. He is one of the founders of modern transplantology.

Nationality: American

Education: M.D., Harvard University, 1943

Occupation: Professor of Surgery at Harvard Medical School; chief plastic surgeon at Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Boston

1. In an interview for the National Catholic Register (December 1-7, 1996), Prof. Joseph Murray asserts that there is no conflict between religion and science:

“Is the Church inimical to science? Growing up as a Catholic and a scientist – I don’t see it. One truth is revealed truth, the other is scientific truth. If you really believe that creation is good, there can be no harm in studying science. The more we learn about creation – the way it emerged – it just adds to the glory of God. Personally, I’ve never seen a conflict.” (Murray, as cited in Meyer 1996).

2. “We’re just working with the tools God gave us. There’s no reason that science and religion have to operate in an adversarial relationship. Both come from the same source, the only source of truth – the Creator.” (Murray, as cited in Meyer 1996).

3. In his article “Murray: Surgeon with soul” (Harvard University Gazette, 4 October 2001), John Lenger wrote:

“To Murray, a doctor’s responsibility is to treat each patient as not just a set of symptoms, but as someone with a spirit that can be helped through medical procedures. The title of his autobiography, Surgery of the Soul (Boston Medical Library, 2001), stems from Murray’s spiritually based approach to medicine. Though he has in the past hesitated to talk publicly about his faith, for fear of being lumped in with the televangelist crowd, Murray is deeply religious. ‘Work is a prayer,’ he said, ‘and I start off every morning dedicating it to our Creator. Every day is a prayer – I feel that, and I feel that very strongly.’ ” (Murray, as cited in Lenger 2001).

4. “I think the important thing to realize is how little we know about anything – how flowers unfold, how butterflies migrate. We have to avoid the arrogance of persons on either side of the science-religion divide who feel that they have all the answers. We have to try to use our intellect with humility.” (Murray, as cited in Meyer 1996).

5. “There are a lot of moral problems that my Jesuit training has helped me with. In my own conscience, I’ve never had a conflict between my religious upbringing and my science.” (Murray, as cited in Meyer 1996).

GUGLIELMO MARCONI – NOBEL LAUREATE IN PHYSICS

Nobel Prize: Guglielmo Marconi (1874–1937) received the 1909 Nobel Prize in Physics for his invention of the first successful system of wireless telegraphy. Marconi is the inventor of the radio; his revolutionary work made possible the electronic communications of the modern world.

Nationality: Italian

Education: Privately educated physicist at Bologna, Florence, and Leghorn (Italy)

Occupation: Inventor and entrepreneur, Italy

1. “The more I work with the powers of Nature, the more I feel God’s benevolence to man; the closer I am to the great truth that everything is dependent on the Eternal Creator and Sustainer; the more I feel that the so-called science, I am occupied with, is nothing but an expression of the Supreme Will, which aims at bringing people closer to each other in order to help them better understand and improve themselves.” (Marconi, as cited in Maria Cristina Marconi 1995, 244).

2. In his letter to his wife Maria Cristina (London, 17 March 1927) Marconi wrote:

“I know how much you love and cherish the beautiful Nature – the expression of God’s Will – where one can find the ideal eternal values: the Truth, the Beauty and the Good (and you possess the three of them).

The harmonious unity of causes and laws forms the Truth; the harmonious unity of lines, colors, sounds, and ideas forms the Beauty; while the harmony of emotions and the will forms the Good, which in being the ultimate expression of the Eternal and Supreme Creator brings man to completion and drives us to seek absolute perfection.” (Marconi, as cited in Maria Cristina Marconi 1995, 260).

3. “Every step, science makes, brings us ever new surprises and achievements. And yet science is like a faint light of a lantern flickering in a deep and thick forest, through which humanity struggles to find its way to God. It is only faith that can lead it to light and serve as a bridge between man and the Absolute.

I am proud to be a Christian. I believe not only as a Christian, but as a scientist as well. A wireless device can deliver a message through the wilderness. In prayer the human spirit can send invisible waves to eternity, waves that achieve their goal in front of God.” (Marconi, as cited in Popov 1992, 298).

4. In a letter to his wife Maria Cristina (Paris, 1 April 1927) Marconi said: “Do not think that I am ungrateful to God for His goodness and benevolence, to which I owe so much, everything. But God has given me this eternal and almighty love and I feel that He has done it for my own good and, I dare believe, for yours too.” (Marconi, as cited in Maria Cristina Marconi 1995, 248).

5. “I believe it would be a great tragedy if men were to lose their faith in prayer. Without the help of prayer I might perhaps have failed where I have succeeded. In allowing me to attain what I have done, God has made of me merely an instrument of His own will, for the revelation of His own Divine power.” (Marconi 1942, 20-21).

6. Concerning the problem of the origin of life and the failure of science to solve it, Marconi said:

“The mystery of life is certainly the most persistent problem ever placed before the mind of man. There is no doubt that from the time humanity began to think, it has occupied itself with the problem of its origin and its future – which is undoubtedly the problem of life. The inability of science to solve it is absolute. This would be truly frightening, if it were not for faith.” (Marconi 1934).

7. “Science alone is unable to explain many things, and most of all, the greatest of mysteries – the mystery of our existence. I believe, not only as a Catholic, but also as a scientist.” (Marconi, as cited in Morrow 1949, 14a).

ARTHUR SCHAWLOW – NOBEL LAUREATE IN PHYSICS

Nobel Prize: Arthur Schawlow (1921–1999) co-inventor of the laser, won the 1981 Nobel Prize in Physics for his contribution to the development of laser spectroscopy and for his revolutionary work in the spectroscopic analysis of the interaction of electromagnetic radiation with matter. Schawlow and Charles Townes hold the original patent for the laser; they are the founders of laser science.

Nationality: American

Education: Ph.D. in physics, University of Toronto, Canada, 1949

Occupation: Researcher at Columbia University and Bell Telephone Laboratories, NJ; Professor of Physics at Stanford University

1. Arthur Schawlow described the relationship between religion and science in the following way:

“Religion is founded on faith. It seems to me that when confronted with the marvels of life and the universe, one must ask why and not just how. The only possible answers are religious. For me that means Protestant Christianity, to which I was introduced as a child and which has withstood the tests of a lifetime.

But the context of religion is a great background for doing science. In the words of Psalm 19, ‘The heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament showeth his handiwork’. Thus scientific research is a worshipful act, in that it reveals more of the wonders of God’s creation.” (Schawlow, as cited in Margenau and Varghese, 1997, 105-106; and in Templeton 1994).

2. “We are fortunate to have the Bible, and especially the New Testament, which tells us so much about God in widely accessible human terms.” (Schawlow, as cited in Margenau and Varghese, 1997, 107).

3. “I find a need for God in the universe and in my own life.” (Schawlow, as cited in Margenau and Varghese, 1997, 107).

4. “There are enormously different cults and religious sects, and I think it’s not unreasonable, because I think God – if He’s as wonderful as we believe – is also very complex, and that different people have to see Him differently.

You can’t expect a peasant and a philosopher to have the same picture of God. I think God is big enough to cover them all, even for science writers – they can have their picture of God.” (Schawlow 1998, Chapter I, Part 5).

5. “The imitation of Jesus is the way to save your life, I think. Beyond that I don’t know.” (Schawlow, as cited in Brian 1995, 242).

6. “The world is just so wonderful that I can’t imagine it was just having come by pure chance.” (Schawlow 1998, Chapter I, Part 5).

Have you seen the sub-atoms of your body?
No, yet you believe that they exist;
Have you felt the strong force that holds the sub-atoms together?
No, yet you know that they must be there;
Have you seen the atoms of a virus invading your body?
No, yet you have no doubt that they exist.
***************************

Oh my atheist colleagues in science:

Have you seen the Earth on which we reside?
Yes, yet you deny that there was a Builder.
Have you felt the air that you breathe?
Yes, yet you doubt that there is a Provider,
Have you seen your body on which your faculties reside?
Yes, yet you don’t believe that there is a Creator.
***************************

Oh my atheist colleagues in science:

If GOD now reveals how IT breathes life into equations?
Would you still deny that IT exists?
If GOD now reveals how IT designs the laws governing particles?
Would you then still deny that IT’s the basis of natural laws?

If GOD now reveals how IT creates, sustains and makes evolve matters?
Would you still deny that IT’s the foundation of science?

***************************

Oh my atheist colleagues in science:
Time has come for you to search the footprint of Scientific GOD,
Would you rather live in denial?
You are the scientific vessel its Creator would like to hitch a ride,
Would you deny ITS pleasure to do just that?
Through all of us Scientific GOD manifests, Would you rather be in idle?

****************************************

WALTER KOHN – NOBEL LAUREATE IN CHEMISTRY

Nobel Prize: Walter Kohn (born 1923) won the 1998 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for his work on the development of the density functional theory, which fundamentally transformed scientists’ approach to the electronic structure of atoms and molecules.

Nationality: Austrian; later American citizen

Education: Ph.D. in physics, Harvard University, 1948

Occupation: Professor of Physics at the University of California, San Diego (1960-1979); Director of the Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara (1979-1984); Professor of Physics at the UCSB, Santa Barbara (1984-1991); Professor Emeritus of Physics and Research Professor at the UCSB, Santa Barbara (1991-present).

1. In the interview, entitled “Dr. Walter Kohn: Science, Religion, and the Human Experience” (July 26, 2001), Dr. Kohn stated:

“I am Jewish and have a strong identification with Judaism. I would say I see myself as religious simultaneously in two ways. One is that I have found that religion, specifically the Jewish religion, has very much enriched my own life and is something that I have conveyed to my children and feel their lives also have been enriched by.

Secondly, I am very much of a scientist, and so I naturally have thought about religion also through the eyes of a scientist. When I do that, I see religion not denominationally, but in a more, let us say, deistic sense. I have been influenced in my thinking by the writings of Einstein who has made remarks to the effect that when he contemplated the world he sensed an underlying Force much greater than any human force. I feel very much the same. There is a sense of awe, a sense of reverence, and a sense of great mystery.” (Kohn 2001a).

2. To the question, “When you refer to yourself as a deist, I understand deism to mean the belief that some divine force set the universe in motion, but after that it’s basically a hands-off relationship. Is that what you mean by deism?” Dr. Kohn replied:

“It includes that. I see no reason to believe that every once in awhile the laws of nature, that as scientists we study, are suspended by divine intervention. But at the same time I do not see the universe as necessarily proceeding in a simple, totally predictable, mechanistic fashion. There continue to be very deep epistemological questions about the significance of sharp scientific laws like the laws of quantum mechanics and the laws that govern the nature of chaos. Both of these fields have irreversibly shaken the 18th and 19th centuries’ purely deterministic, mechanistic view of the world.

These are my reactions to your question as to how I see deism and your statement - to paraphrase what you said – that the world is set in motion by some divine force and now it runs on its own. I’m trying to say it’s not quite so simple. It’s incredible, one struggles for the right word. One feels awe and reverence for the world of experience and the world of science.

In any case there’s a sense of a world that to an amazing extent yields to our comprehension, but fundamentally remains incomprehensible. And because it is manifestly such a wonderful thing, it leads one – I follow here in Einstein’s footsteps – to sense some Force that can take responsibility and credit for it.” (Kohn 2001a).

3. To the question, “What do you think should be the relationship between science and religion?” Walter Kohn replied: “Mutual respect. They are complementary important parts of the human experience.” (Kohn 2002).

4. And to the inquiry, “What do you think about the existence of God?” Walter Kohn gave the following answer: “There are essential parts of the human experience about which science intrinsically has nothing to say. I associate them with an entity which I call God.” (Kohn 2002).

5. In his lecture Reflections of a Physicist after an Encounter with the Vatican and Pope John Paul II (April 20, 2001, University of California, Santa Barbara) Dr. Kohn said:

“Certainly science, especially physics and chemistry, is a very important part of my identity. But I also consider myself a religious person, and in two senses: one, based on my liberal Jewish upbringing which I have passed on to my children; the other, a kind of non-denominational deism which springs from my awe of the world of our experiences and is heightened by my identity as a scientist. It also includes a conviction that science alone is an insufficient guide to life, leaving many deep questions unanswered and needs unfulfilled.” (Kohn 2001b).

In their Article "Bridge between Science & Religion", Nadeem Haque & Mehran Banaei take "the route of intelligence, rather than that of chance" and suggest "that Qur’an can be used as a guide and motivator to dissolve the artificial boundary between the sacred and the profane, science and divinity, through a natural rapprochement based on the correlation between causality in nature and pristine revelation. Inevitably, such a rapprochement would further set the stage for transforming human thought towards a unitary understanding of the whole purpose of creation and man’s role within the vastness of cosmic order. In fact, anyone imbued with such an outlook would not be searching for a pristine revelation to act as a bridge between science and religion. That which is one, needs no bridge. Indeed, in this vein of reality, it can certainly be proclaimed that science is truly religion and religion truly science."

In his Essay entitled "Chance or Intelligence?", Nadeem Haque argues "that, if our answer to creation by chance is negative, there can only be a unique governing intelligence." He further suggest that this "vast singular intelligence must have created and developed all living and non-living things, as well as particles/energy and time itself."

In his Essay entitled "Did the Buddha Believe in God?", Nadeem Haque argues "that Buddha, contrary to being an atheist or a person who never answered or avoided answering the question of God’s existence, as some of the present day Buddhist sects and most Western and Eastern scholars portray, also believed in One God."

In their Essay entitled "Meaningless or Purposeful?", Nadeem Haque & Mehran Banaei "reflect as to whether there is a purpose behind the Big Bang, and ask such questions as: what role are we to play, if any, in the realm that has evolved afterwards? Did nature evolve from the Big Bang merely for subservience to Man?"

This issue also contain several poems written by Nadeem Haque under the title "The Magic of Existence."

Huping Hu & Maoxin Wu

November 28, 2011

RENE DESCARTES (1596-1650), founder of Analytical Geometry and Modern Philosophy

1. In the beginning of his Meditations (1641) Descartes wrote:

“I have always been of the opinion that the two questions respecting God and the Soul were the chief of those that ought to be determined by help of Philosophy rather than of Theology; for although to us, the faithful, it be sufficient to hold as matters of faith, that the human soul does not perish with the body, and that God exists, it yet assuredly seems impossible ever to persuade infidels of the reality of any religion, or almost even any moral virtue, unless, first of all, those two things be proved to them by natural reason. And since in this life there are frequently greater rewards held out to vice than to virtue, few would prefer the right to the useful, if they were restrained neither by the fear of God nor the expectation of another life.” (Descartes 1901).

2. “It is absolutely true that we must believe in God, because it is also taught by the Holy Scriptures. On the other hand, we must believe in the Sacred Scriptures because they come from God.” (Descartes 1950, Letter of Dedication).

3. “And thus I very clearly see that the certitude and truth of all science depends on the knowledge alone of the true God, insomuch that, before I knew him, I could have no perfect knowledge of any other thing. And now that I know him, I possess the means of acquiring a perfect knowledge respecting innumerable matters, as well relative to God himself and other intellectual objects as to corporeal nature.” (Descartes 1901, Meditation V).

LORD KELVIN (1824-1907), founder of Thermodynamics and Energetics

1. Lord Kelvin (Sir William Thomson) closed his presidential address to the British Association for the Advancement of Science (Edinburgh, August 1871) thus:

“Overpoweringly strong proofs of intelligent and benevolent design lie all around us; and if ever perplexities, whether metaphysical or scientific, turn us away from them for a time, they come back upon us with irresistible force, showing to us through Nature the influence of a free will, and teaching us that all living things depend on one ever-acting Creator and Ruler.” (Kelvin 1871; see also Seeger 1985a, 100-101).

2. In his first lecture in the “Introductory Course of Natural Philosophy,” Sir William Thomson stated:

“We feel that the power of investigating the laws established by the Creator for maintaining the harmony and permanence of His works is the noblest privilege which He has granted to our intellectual state. As the depth of our insight into the wonderful works of God increases, the stronger are our feelings of awe and veneration in contemplating them and in endeavoring to approach their Author.” (Kelvin, as cited Seeger 1985a, 99-100).

3. In a speech to University College (1903), Kelvin said: “Do not be afraid to be free thinkers. If you think strongly enough, you will be forced by science to the belief in God.” (Kelvin, as cited in Yahya 2002).

4. “The atheistic idea is so nonsensical that I cannot put it into words.” (Lord Kelvin, Vict. Inst., 124, p. 267, as cited in Bowden 1982, 218).

5. In his address at the annual meeting of the Christian Evidence Society (May 23, 1889), Kelvin said: “I have long felt that there was a general impression in the non-scientific world, that the scientific world believes Science has discovered ways of explaining all the facts of Nature without adopting any definite belief in a Creator. I have never doubted that that impression was utterly groundless.” (Kelvin 1889).

6. “Science can do little positively towards the objects of this society. But it can do something, and that something is vital and fundamental. It is to show that what we see in the world of dead matter and of life around us is not a result of the fortuitous concourse of atoms.” (Kelvin 1889).