Open Theology & Science - Week 3 Recap

Here's my third and final recap on the 3-week "Open Theology & Science" conference that I attended in the Boston area. This is coming a few days late because my time is precious right now, so I'm going to 'cheat' a bit and link to a series of blog posts on the conference by my good friend and fellow conference participant, Greg Boyd.

Monday, July 2: Presentation by Dr. Warren Brown, Professor of experimental neuropsychology at Fuller Seminary. (Greg's summary)

Tuesday, July 3: Presentation on "Forgiveness" by Dr. Everett Worthington, Professor of Psychology at Virginia Commonwealth University (Greg's summary)

My comments: One of the most interesting presentations of the seminar.

Tuesday's Debate between John Sanders, Professor of Theology at Hendrix College, and John Jefferson Davis, Professor of Theology at Gordon Conwell Seminary (Greg's summary)

My comments: Yes, it was a frustrating debate. Sanders was gentlemanly, gave a clear presentation of his position, and did his best to respond to the barrage of questions that Davis threw at him. Davis, on the other hand, had made no effort to acquaint himself with the actual writings of an open theist, like John Sanders. He was also quite rude, taking every opportunity he could to hog the microphone. When asked a question he would almost always respond with a question. As for his positive position, he never developed it beyond giving vague slogans. "Libertarian free will is DEEPLY FLAWED" - Why exactly? "God exercises a posteriori, bi-lateral determination" - Huh? Davis presented this idea as his own unique modification of Calvinism, but under examination it turns out to be just verbal repackaging.

Thursday, July 4: Presentation on the Mind-Body Problem by William Hasker, Emeritus Professor of Philosophy, Huntington College (Greg's summary)

My comments: Hasker only clear illustration of his idea of "emergent dualism" is to point to how a magnet gives rise to a magnetic field. It's a useful analogy because the field seems to have causal powers of its own, independent of the magnet. I doubt, however, that this view works at the end of the day and so, for my part, I prefer something more like Thomistic dualism. One problem with the magnet analogy is that it's way too simple to show how it is possible for substantial "self" to emerge out of a functioning brain. For one thing, magnetic fields don't seem to have near enough structure to capture the depth of human cognition. Another problem that I have is an ethical one. If the "self" emerges out of the brain, then it's hard to avoid the consequence that individuals with "better brains" are going to have intrinsically better selves, which naturally leads to a moral stratification in which smarter people are intrinsically more valuable than others. In other words, I worry that any sort of emergentist position fatally undermines the idea that "all persons are created equal". If Hasker's right, that may be a bullet we have to bite, but I'd rather not go there if possible.

Friday, July 5 - Presentation by Rev. Dr. John Polkinghorne (Greg's summary)

My two cents: Polkinghorne is a sharp guy. I really enjoyed his presentation. One of these days I'll get around to reading some of his books!