Yesterday, we spoke about scientific materialism and its denial of anything supernatural or transcendent.

Today, with help of Professor Stephen M. Barr’s booklet, Science and Religion, we will see how “Lucky” we must be to be alive, if there is no God who created us. The conditions that made life possible are sometimes known as “Anthropic coincidences” – here are six:

(1) If the world did not obey the principles of quantum mechanics, atoms and molecules would not be stable building blocks with well-defined properties out of which living things could be built.

(2) If the electromagnetic forces between particles were significantly stronger than they are, the electric repulsion within atomic nuclei would blow them apart, except for the nuclei of the very lightest elements.

(3) If the so-called “strong force”, which holds nuclei together, were even a small fraction weaker than it is, a crucial nucleus called deuterium could not exist, and the nuclear reactions that power the Sun and similar stars would not take place – depriving earth of the energy needed for life. Moreover, these same nuclear reactions involving deuterium are needed to initiate the chain of reactions that form all the elements of the Periodic Table (except hydrogen). Without them, the only element in nature would have been hydrogen, rather than the rich palette of elements needed for life. (Twenty-five elements are found in the human body.)

(4) Neutrons are very slightly heavier than protons. Had it been the other way around, isolated protons would be unstable and hydrogen would not exist (though other elements could). Almost all organic molecules contain hydrogen, so life would probably not exist.

(5) If the number of extended dimensions of space were greater than three, gravity would act differently and would not allow planets to orbit stars – they would either plunge into the stars or fly off into space.

(6) If a parameter called the cosmological constant were not fantastically small (about 10⁻¹²⁰), the universe would not have lasted the billions of years needed for life to evolve, but would have collapsed or blown apart in only a tiny fraction of a second.”

These show that it is surely more probable than not, that we are here by the will of someone higher than just accident or chance.

Science and Religion: the Myth of Conflict is available from CTS priced £2.50

	Creation and Science - Who created the Universe? Is a creator even necessary? Can science explain how the Universe came into being without reference to a creator God?
	Global Warming – How should we respond? – Global warming is seen as the defining issue of our generation. Does the Church believe that it is really happening, and what should Catholics do to care for our planet?
	Galileo: Science & Faith – Is the Church against Science and Reason? The Galileo controversy has become a paragon of faith’s supposed hostility towards science. This booklet explains the facts of the Galileo case and traces the subsequent development of the myth that the Catholic Church has always been the enemy of science. This history proves that even in the Galileo case, the Church remained true to its belief that faith and reason belong together.

Originally, what we know as “science” was known as “natural philosophy”, and it was Catholic educational institutions that first structured that knowledge and passed it from one generation to the next systematically.

Now, it is all called “science”, yet that strand of philosophy has not been lost; indeed, for Professor Stephen M. Barr, author of the CTS booklet Science and Religion: the myth of conflict, it is a philosophy “that falsely claims to be the logical outcome of scientific discoveries”, not science itself, that has caused problems in creating conflicts with religion.

According to proponents of this view called “scientific materialism” or “physicalism”, nothing exists save matter governed by the laws of physics; this starting point rules out the existence of souls, as well as God. Professor Barr sums up this idea and its shortcomings, like so:

“Science has shown us a universe that is cold, uncaring, inhumanly vast, and governed by ‘blind, impersonal laws.’ This suggests to some people that religious believers are engaged in wishful thinking in imagining that a personal, loving being is behind it all. Christians, however, have never imagined that the physical universe cared about them or was personal in any way. The impersonality of the physical world may be an argument against pantheism or paganism, which see nature as a god or as filled with gods, but not against Judaism or Christianity, which sharply distinguish nature from God. And, as far as the laws of nature being ‘blind’ and ‘impersonal’, what else would they be? It is not the law that ‘sees’ or is personal, but the Lawgiver.”

The more complex point that follows on from this philosophical idea is why has this scientific materialism become so popular? There are many historical-cultural factors but it could also be said, as Professor Barr does, that:

“As the saying goes, ‘To the man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail.’ Psychologists tend to look for psychological explanations, political theorists for political ones, and economists for economic ones. Those in the physical sciences are prone to reduce everything to physical explanations.”

The fact is that those in physical sciences have become more important and more vocal as time has gone on, but the scientific materialism some of the most famous ones advocate, is not science, but philosophy. It is important to understand the distinction between gathering the evidence and drawing conclusions from it.

Tomorrow, we will look at what are known as “anthropic coincidences”, showing just how lucky we are to be here at all.

Science and Religion: the Myth of Conflict is available from CTS priced £2.50

	Creation and Science - Who created the Universe? Is a creator even necessary? Can science explain how the Universe came into being without reference to a creator God?
	Global Warming – How should we respond? – Global warming is seen as the defining issue of our generation. Does the Church believe that it is really happening, and what should Catholics do to care for our planet?
	Galileo: Science & Faith – Is the Church against Science and Reason? The Galileo controversy has become a paragon of faith’s supposed hostility towards science. This booklet explains the facts of the Galileo case and traces the subsequent development of the myth that the Catholic Church has always been the enemy of science. This history proves that even in the Galileo case, the Church remained true to its belief that faith and reason belong together.