Listeners' Reflections
This is your place to publicly comment on the topics and issues addressed in Speaking of Faith programs. React in a personal way, and put into words what this program meant to you.
Submit Your Reflection about "Science and Hope."
Embedded Morality and Mathematics (July 20, 2007)
While listening to your lecture with George Ellis, I thought of a book that I am currently reading, The Universal Kabbalah by Leonora Leet (recently deceased). Ellis was never able to directly link the notion of an embedded morality to mathematics. Ms. Leet's book posits this in great mathematical detail, layering the human expression of ethics through differing levels of consciousness. I'd love to have you take a look at this book and interview rabbinic scholars and mathematicians about her insights.
Denise Garlow
Atlanta, GA (Listens to SOF OnDemand)
Kant and Ellis (July 13, 2007)
After listening to your conversation with George Ellis last night, I stepped out and looked at the sky. It brought, as so often, an Emanuel Kant quote to mind, which every German Gymnasiast of my age learned in school:
"Zwei Dinge erfüllen das Gemüt mit immer neuer und zunehmender Bewunderung und Ehrfurcht, je öfter und anhaltender sich das Nachdenken damit beschäftigt: der besternte Himmel über uns und das moralische Gesetz in mir."
"Two things fill our souls with ever new and increasing admiration and awe the more often and the longer we ponder it in contemplation: The starred sky above us and the moral law within me."
I was struck by the similarity of thought by two great thinkers. As a biologist I wander whether this is might no largely be an analogous rather than homologous development (evolution) of ideas, considering the fact that Ellis never mentions Kant.
Winfried Berger
Huntington, PA (Listens to SOF OnDemand)
Respond Like the Amish (May 22, 2007)
Enjoyed very much Dr. Ellis message and printed the transcript for use with our discussion group. Reading Dr. Ellis' message, I was reminded of the slaughter of the Amish girls last fall. The reaction of the Amish was truly enlightening and consistent with the non-violent theme Dr. Ellis presented. What a wonderful example. If only we could have responded the same way after 9/11. Maybe it would have made a difference.
Dan Clinton
Northville, MI (WUOM, 91.7 FM)
Religion and Science Don't Mix (May 18, 2007)
Ms. Tippett notes in her journal: "And I will continue to insist that the competing certainties of our public life do not reflect the whole truth about anything, especially the relationship between science and religion." And it is for this reason that Ms. Tippett will only have on guests who insist that religion and science can be reconciled, or even that they are simply alternative ways of describing the same phenomena (she will not even have on guests who advance Gould's "Mutually non-overlapping magisteria" notion). In eschewing scientific certainty, Ms. Tippett is advancing her own certainty (that religion and science most definitely fit together as hand in glove), ignoring the other possibility.
To claim (as some writers here seem to do) that physics and theology are just two ways of describing the same phenomenon (in physics there are positive and negative charges, while in theology there are good and evil) is silliness.
Defining electrons and protons as negative and positive is a convention to help explain the way they attract, but this has no ethical value (an electron behaves no better than a proton and one is no more desirable than the other). The coincidence between the number of major particle categories (2- electrons and protons) and the number of major kinds of behavior (2- good and evil) is just that — meaningless coincidence. One can just as well find meaning in the equally coincidental duality of peanut butter (which also comes in 2 kinds — smooth and crunchy).
While scientific beliefs, over time, may be refined, or may even be proven wrong, religious beliefs can neither be proven right or wrong (since they are not subject to proof — consider Karl Popper's notion of non-disprovability). For this reason, what we know about God or religion today is not in any way an advance over what we knew about god 1000 years ago (or what we are likely to know 1000 years hence). No statement or theory about God or religion, past present or future, will be any more right or wrong than any other, even if one particular theory happens to make you feel better than another. Science, over time, has gotten, and will continue to get, closer to the truth of some things (and will admit uncertainty where there remains uncertainty). Religion simply does not share these basic critical qualities, with science, and for those reason alone the two cannot be reconciled.
Scott Benjamin
Pelham, NY (WNYC, 93.9 FM)
A Circle of Destruction (May 14, 2007)
I am a South African working in Zimbabwe. Georges' comment about Hollywood's contribution to the way our youth, and some adults, behave is a fact. The slow breakdown of traditional African values of respect and consideration for others is being replaced with Rambo and kung fu. Harm and kill to get your way. The adults who allow kids to view this stuff were themselves brought up on it so we are now in a circle of destruction. Where this will all end, God knows.
Mike du Toit
Harare, Zimbabwe (Listens to SOF OnDemand)
No Religious Monopoly on Values (May 13, 2007)
I enjoyed the show, and as a student and practitioner of active nonviolence, I especially appreciated the comments on the force of nonviolence. Much is made of how all religions share core values, and the guest pointed to this as evidence that these values or behaviors are "out there" to be discovered like mathematics; they are not invented by religion. What he didn't say is that these values and behaviors are discovered, practiced, taught, and learned by people who are not religious as well. Religion does not have a monopoly in this area, and I find it curious that my compassion, nonviolence, self-sacrifice and forgiveness lead people to think I am religious — or at least "spiritual" when I'm not.
Liz Paul
Boise, ID (KBSX, 91.5 FM)
Kenosis Needs to Be Better Understood (May 13, 2007)
I consider myself a radical Christian, so I found George Ellis' interview to be enlightening. I had no idea that kenosis was a part of anyone's science or ethics. His comments and ideas have broadened my understanding of kenosis and make me want to read his works. As a former student of Thomas J.J. Altizer, I recommend you interview him on his ideas about kenosis and the death of God. I specifically recommend reading Dr. Altizer's book, The Gospel of Christian Atheism.
Alling Jones
Milledgeville, GA (WMUM, 89.7 FM)
Forgiveness and Counterinsurgency (May 13, 2007)
I see that this program was aired in 2005, and I am so glad and grateful that you played it again this morning, when our own feeble attempts at counterinsurgency are failing so tragically in Iraq. The letter from the Scots soldier is a beautiful, moving but tough-minded account of what counterinsurgency is all about: Only the citizens of a country suffering under an insurgency can end it, and the job of an occupying or peacekeeping army can only be to empower the citizenry.
This letter tells how that is to be done — by putting civilian lives first. It contrasts utterly with the stories we hear from our soldiers in the field, which always emphasize protection of their fellow soldiers first — a value entirely appropriate for a conventional war, but utterly inappropriate in an insurgency. This is not to say that it would be natural or easy for our troops to adopt this protective attitude, but this letter as well as your program today show that it is possible — indeed, that as long as we are there we can't succeed without it.
Another truth that I learned from this program is the absolute necessity of loving those who oppress and those who support oppression. I have relatives, some of them Quakers, who still defend the invasion and occupation of Iraq and still believe in war as a tool for advancing democracy. It has been a grave temptation for me to dismiss my relatives and distance myself from them. I see clearly now that this is wrong and I must change the way I think about them. Thank you for these and other insights. Thank you for all your fine work and for the hope you inspire every week.
Claire Gavin
Fairfield, CT (WEDW, 88.5 FM)
Privilege (May 13, 2007)
What a privilege to spend an hour with George Ellis in such a sensitive and intelligent interview. His ideas do send a clear light of understanding into the dark confusion that greets us every day in the news. Food for deep thinking. Thank you.
Pat de Groot
Provincetown, MA (WCAI, 90.1 FM)
Physics, Ethics, and The Theory of Everything (May 13, 2007)
Heard your show today (Mother's Day) about the ethical universe. I have been looking into this area and find quite an agreement between physics and theology. The only problem is that physics tries to deal in the real (which is kind of difficult in theoretical physics/cosmology) and theology refuses to believe in evolution/growth. The refusal to believe in systems evolution is odd because most religions advocate "growth" or "enlightenment" through exposure to the tenets of a religion. This seems to me like religion is advocating evolution as long as you evolve along the path laid down by that particular religion.
Anyway, physicists are not any better by speaking of the balance of positive energy versus negative energy (slightly more positive). Hmmm does this sound like the old good versus evil in slightly different context? Plus, the theory of everything breaks down when strings, brains, and multiple items are introduced to explain everything. Strings are one-dimensional, brains can be multidimensional but are usually described as two-dimensional. Well, in a three-dimensional world we need a three-dimensional object to explain it all: waves. Think of quadrillions of quadrillions of vectors going off in all directions. Throw in quantum uncertainty (or "free will") and off you go.
Edward Shepherd
Archdale, NC (WFDD, 88.5 FM)
False Dichotomy (August 18, 2005)
I am always perturbed by the idea that science and faith cannot be discussed in certain venues, or by the same people (re: a reflection posted below on this show). Science and faith are both attempts to discover truth.
Science is the attempt to discover the truth of how things work by poking at the things we can see around us, although we have now progressed to poking things we could never see ourselves. I am a biomedical engineering graduate student, and I have spent countless hours poking and gazing at cells and proteins using complex machines and lasers. We're trying to figure out how life works, using all the tools our cleverness and persistence have allowed us to create.
Faith is the attempt to discover the truth of the meaning of life. We have at most two tools for this job — our minds and our souls (heart, spirit, whatever the label), and we must apply them with all the generosity and persistence we have.
There are many scientists who claim to have no faith, no religion, no spirituality. But ask them this: why do you work so hard to find the answer to the question you're investigating? The answer invariably boils down to something about helping people. "Find a cure for cancer." "Invent a machine to help deaf people hear." "Improve the efficiency in how we use our resources." "Develop capabilities that allow us to explore more of our universe." "Understand a new species." All answers that implicitly tell us that life has value, and that we are in fact all in this together. This is, I think, what Albert Einstein meant when he said "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."
John Pedersen
Kenosha, WI (WBEZ, 91.5 FM)
Religion or Politics? (July 10, 2005)
It's good to hear a Quaker voice on the program. I'd love to hear more about the Quakers and the roles Quakers have played in the world, (e.g., in American education, in American politics, in wartime Japan, etc.). I certainly agree with your guest, George Ellis, that human knowledge has limits, and sociology is probably more technology than science.
However, I wonder about the assertion that ethics, being outside the realm of science, is therefore a religious topic. Is this not a political topic? Or perhaps it is the Quaker genius to realize the natural (?) coincidence of religion and politics? (This is, of course, quite different from the "religious right," which attempts to formalize personal faith in addition to politics and outward religion.)
That is, to the degree ethics or aesthetics offer certainties, they should be amenable to science. When, however, right and wrong are subject to deliberation and human judgment, they become political, do they not? (I know we in the U.S. are not accustomed to thinking of ethics as a product of politics, but I would suggest that in the U.S., government is increasingly apolitical.) Specifically, Mr. Ellis speaks to the idea of power, which, when distinguished from strength, force, and violence [Arendt], is clearly a political term.
M.K. Mori
Los Angeles, CA (KPCC, 89.3 FM)
Program Excellence (July 10, 2005)
I am not affiliated with any religion. In fact, I find the rise of fundamentalism (of ALL flavors) greatly disturbing — even frightening. Your program reassures me that there are, much to my relief and delight, thoughtful, questioning people of all faiths. You give me hope. The program today, "Science and Hope" with George F.R. Ellis, is undoubtedly one of
your most interesting. At least for me, it is also one of your most enlightening. Thank you.
Mary Buchanan
Abilene, TX (KACU, 89.7 FM)
Compassion and Transformation in War (July 10, 2005)
I was so moved by the letter that the guest today read from a Scottish soldier about his service in Yemen, near the end of the program. My brother is currently training to go over to Iraq with the US Army Special Forces. I would love to send him a copy of this letter to support him in the challenges he will inevitably face over there.
Jonathan Bastiani
New York City, NY (KUER, 90.1 FM)
Speaking of Faith Isn't Speaking of Science (July 10, 2005)
I have a criticism regarding your recent show about the intersection of science and religion. It is a criticism that could be made of most popular presentations of the subject. That is, you presented one scientist's opinions about a subject as the scientific perspective on the subject. There are two problems with this presentation.
First, being an expert in one field of science doesn't make you an expert in all areas of scientific inquiry. (A common mistake along these lines is to have a physicist speak about consciousness, anthropology, or ethics.) The second mistake is to present the faith or opinions of a scientist as a scientific perspective. Scientists are as complicated as anyone else and are capable of both doing good science and holding non-scientific beliefs.
I don't at all mean to say that views such as George Ellis' ethical beliefs should not be heard. I respect him very much and enjoyed the show. However, presenting his views as the intersection of science and religion or, even worse, a "science of ethics" is just wrong. The show is a scientist speaking about something besides science. The idea that ethics is a property of the universe at large instead of a particular kind of social interaction is far outside the scientific mainstream and not even Ellis would consider it a scientific theory. As a good general rule, if you are speaking of faith, you aren't speaking of science. Thank you.
Josh Morgan
St. Louis, MO (KWMU, 90.7 FM)
Emptying Oneself (July 10, 2005)
As usual, the program was pertinent to the times and issues. I thought the example from a soldier serving in Yemen was truly PEACE KEEPING. I am a Franciscan Religious and looking at the night sky… the moon, stars, planets are awe-inspiring to me. The inner peace and love Francis Assisi for his Creator made all creation good. His visit to the Sultan during the Crusades listening in love and acceptance gave him a new perspective. Kenosis (emptying) ourselves to reconciliation. Kudos.
Patricia Cosgrove
Aston, PA (WHYY, 91.0 FM)
Working Towards Nonviolence (July 10, 2005)
I am so glad I finally made time to comment. Today, Sunday morning, I heard you interview George Ellis, a fellow South African. I am of Indian descent but a fourth-generation African, until I came to the USA on a Fulbright. That scholarship allowed me to escape apartheid in 1983 (and I did get to meet that insightful/far-sighted leader, William Fulbright).
However, I have worked peacefully, assertively, and quietly for nonviolent change in my native land, speaking to all manner of groups in the 1980s, especially in Ohio and Indiana. I promote Gandhi, Cesar Chavez, Emerson, Thoreau, ML King, Margaret Fullerton and their ideas, again quietly. Not so quietly that my former professors have not tried to destroy one with so different ideas than their own. For the most part my work goes on, even when I returned briefly to South Africa to work in the Foreign Ministry (1996-98). I love it that you promote these ideas of nonviolence, as does George Ellis. I lived in Cape Town too, and I do appreciate all Quakers. Thank him for me, and your station and programmers. Three cheers for practical faith for the world of the 21st century!
Aneil Deo
Greenbelt, MD (WETA, 90.9 FM)
Polarity vs. Unity (July 10, 2005)
It is interesting that as life evolves the will of the most advanced beings is more and more aligned with Divine Unity. Much as a rock is still when surrounded by other rocks, a person is held in gridlock by the primitive manifestation of materialism within his mind. Liberation from this comes with altruism, the essence of the spiritual side of religion. As our "religious medium," as I like to call it, becomes less restrictive, we will find our souls reuniting collectively. Exclusivity in religion is damaging to the spiritual path, and it shows how human nature is able to block salvation. Where do we go from here?
I enjoy your findings. Would you agree that our societies have instilled within us a desirous nature? I believe this is the problem in our world. We need more like Lei Fung (see early Communist Revolution), and less like George Bush. We need a "diet" of desire.
Drew Marshall
Wilmington, DE (Listens via Web Audio)
Intersecting Lines of Thought (July 10, 2005)
I greatly enjoyed today's program and your discussion with George Ellis. I had not read anything by him previously but will follow up immediately. While listening to the discussion concerning "kenosis" I was struck by how familiar the concept sounded to Carl Schrag's concept described in his book, God as Otherwise than Being. Schrag's concept of the semantics of "the Gift" seems, at least on the surface, quite similar to Ellis' "kenosis."
I also see similarities between "kenosis" with E. Levinas' concept of alterity and transcendence as expressed in humanity's subjective ethical interaction (relationships) with one another. Now that I see several intersecting lines of thought, I'll have to spend some more time on this subject matter. Perhaps at some point in the future you might consider a discussion along these lines. Certainly Schrag's concept of God otherwise than Being would prove interesting. Thank you very much for this week's topic and your very interesting, thought-provoking, and informative program.
Kurt A. Frantzen
Colchester, CT (WNPR, 89.1 FM)
A Related Midrash (July 9, 2005)
I listened with great interest to the program featuring Dr. George Ellis. Toward the end of the program, Krista Tippett quoted from Albert Einstein to the effect that every question that he devoted his life's work to investigating he had asked at age 3. This particularly intrigued me since there is a story in the Jewish Midrashic tradition that says that Abraham was hidden by himself in a cave from shortly after birth to age 3. At that time, he came out of the cave, saw the sun and the physical world and asked, "Who created all this and me?" From there, he went on to realize that there was the power of one God behind all of the physical world. I would like to know the source of the Einstein quotation. Thanks very much, and I look forward to listening to more of these programs.
Rabbi Marim Charry
Great Neck, NY (WNYC, 820 AM)
What I Learned from George Ellis (July 9, 2005)
I always enjoy and learn so much listening to Speaking of Faith. Thank you for
the thoughtful preparation you give to each program. I especially enjoyed listening to George Ellis this evening. Perhaps, as he claims, he is not a theologian, still his insights on nonviolence and kenosis are powerful. Kenosis — how does one prove it? As Krista Tippett concluded after Ellis told the story of the British Army officer, "you point to it when you see it — you tell stories about it." How true, and it does not have to be big, notable stories of self-sacfrice — it can be found in small daily life experiences. The important thing is to look for it and recognize it — to tell stories about it.
Indeed, universal truths run parallel across many faiths. Our understanding of kenosis is evident of this. Thank you Krista for your insightful interview with George Ellis and for encouraging reflection among listeners.
Mitzi Ethridge
Lilburn, GA (Listens via Web Audio)
A Logical Conclusion (July 9, 2005)
Your program, which I try to listen to each weekend, sometimes twice, always satisfies and stimulates. I am a devoted listener. You asked a question of Dr. Ellis, "If god created the world, who created god?" The answer seems logical though I am not cosmologically sophisticated. If the development of man and the evolution of all religions demonstrate a moral and ethical direction, and the true experience of the peacemakers all throughout history show incredible similarity, then it can only be that man created god as that kenotic place that should be the moral/ethical name of being in the world. Thank you and the many folks you share on your program for enabling me to have it.
Marc Rice
Yonkers, NY (WNYC, 820 AM)
Kenosis and Nonviolence (July 7, 2005)
Your show is such a gift to us all. I enjoyed your kenotic interview style — instead of probing your subjects to make them react, you seem to open yourself to whatever they have to offer, subduing your own ego in the process. Typical NPR interview behavior — similar to Terry Gross — and so different from what we see every day in the mainstream media.
Listening to George Ellis as he attempts to help us understand the meaning of kenosis, I am struck by how the core of his message seems to be the incredible power of the seemingly powerless concept of nonviolence. Nonviolence is so powerful because it comes from the strength of a superior moral force as opposed to violence which comes from fear and weakness. When I think of nonviolence, I think of Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King, Jr., but Jesus may be the best example of all for the concept of nonviolence; he had all of the power but chose to use none of it to defend himself from his enemies. And look at the result — victory over death, the enemy that terrorizes us all, for those who have faith. Jesus taught us to love our enemies, just as George Ellis does, but instead of being a self-denying sacrifice this is a self-empowering approach to life that frees us from fear and allows us to live our lives as God intended.
Don Gleiter
Warminster, PA (WETA, 90.9 FM)
Additional Works (July 7, 2005)
I'm looking forward to hearing your piece on "Science and Hope." I fight nihilism daily
in my own little world. But I write today wondering if you have looked at Lionel Tiger's Biology of Hope? Keep up the good works!
Paul Mazzuca
Alexandria, VA (WETA, 90.9 FM)
An Expanded Definition (July 7, 2005)
I have no great insight to offer, but since Ms. Tippett looked up cosmology in the dictionary, I thought I might add a little. Kosmos does indeed refer to the universe, but the Greek root signifies much more. It also refers to beauty and order. Our word cosmetic, for example, is from the same root. Since I suspect that this program will perhaps lean in this direction, that might be useful trivia to know.
Allan Mahnke
Golden Valley, MN (KNOW, 91.1 FM)
What I Learned From George Ellis (April 2, 2005)
Since I discovered your program via The Writer's Almanac and American Public
Media, I have been working my way through your archived programs with much delight. I find your interviewing style enjoyable and, most significantly, your range of topics interesting and often important.
While recently listening to your discussion with George Ellis, one of your peripheral comments caught my attention and prompted me to write this note. It was a comment which reflects a common notion in our society, but is one with which I strongly disagree. It is, in my view, at the root of our environmental and social crises. That comment was: "…what human beings do, which is essentially what happens in the world…" Human beings are but one species. Much goes on in the world without human involvement, intervention, or even awareness. Without that activity, we would not be here. We disregard or interfere with those activities at our peril. Besides, they are fascinating, physical manifestations of the creativity inherent in life.
I urge you to consider focusing a program on this or a related issue. One place to start would be with David Ehrenfeld's The Arrogance of Humanism.
Merry Youle
Ocean View, HI (Listens via Web Audio)
What I Learned From George Ellis (June 27, 2004)
Overwhelming force can build peace provided it is not used. His story about the British Army officer in Aden (now Yemen) leading his men so they were prepared to die there for peace moved me (I am an old soldier) greatly. I saw how it is better (after winning the war) for soldiers to be very respectful and sparing in their use of power so they can win the peace.
John Broomfield
Exton, PA (WHYY, 91.0 FM)
Kenosis (June 30, 2004)
It is good to have a word to go with the abiding feeling within me. I like it a lot better than "lazy," "unambitious," "un-American," or even "martyr" or "saint." So much of what programs those of us who live ordinary lives directly opposes the concept of kenosis. The inclination towards competition, greed, and self indulgence is appealed to and encouraged constantly. How do we "discover" the concept when there are so many forces distracting us?
I really enjoyed the program and will find the book and attempt to read it although most of the material I look at to find understanding of the universe is more than I can even begin to comprehend. I don't mind though. A glimpse can overwhelm and astonish me.
Rudi Ash
Atlanta, GA (WABE, 90.1 FM)
Kenosis (June 27, 2004)
This is the first time I've listened to your show and I LOVED this man and his thoughts.
Susan Chisholm
Avon, MN (KNSR, 88.9 FM)
