Information and Meaning

We have all seen this situation numerous times. We are sitting among friends talking about some subject when someone asks a question to which no one has the answer. Soon, someone pulls out their phone and googles the question (yes, I did just use the verb form of Google; language is always changing). A few seconds later we have the information. Information is ubiquitous. What is not as available is meaning. Alister McGrath has said,

We live in an age when the growth of the Internet has made it easier than ever to gain access to information and accumulate knowledge. But information is not the same as meaning, nor is knowledge identical with wisdom. Many feel engulfed in a tsunami of facts, in which we can find no meaning.1

He speaks of the glut of information and the dearth of meaning.

. . . we cannot make sense of the "shower of facts" with which we are bombarded. There seems to be "no loom to weave it into fabric." . . . . we find ourselves living on the brink of incoherence and meaninglessness. Meaning seems to have been withheld from us - if there is any meaning to be found at all.
Many find the thought of a meaningless world to be unbearable. If there is no meaning, then there is no point in life.2

Those of us who claim to have found meaning find that our hope is sometimes called into question. People ask us how we can possibly believe in such meta-narratives when "all of them are power structures of control." Of course, that last phrase is the proclamation of another meta-narrative.

For my part, I don't ever plan to give up the search for meaning. This is the ultimate "Holy Grail." The quest is as important as the result. There is still hope at the end of the journey if we are willing to engage the question. Yet many have given up the quest choosing instead to medicate themselves with their prescription of choice. They withdraw from the world and from questions of meaning. They fill their lives with entertainment, isolation, depressants, and mood boosters. Perhaps the real problem for the average person is not that the universe might be meaningless but that "the universe might turn out to have a purpose of which he does not approve."3

1 (McGrath 2011, Kindle Loc 91)
2 (McGrath 2011, Kindle Loc 91)
3 (McGrath 2011, Kindle Loc 112)

Meaning in the Clues

I am presently reading an enjoyable detective novel by A.D. Scott as well as the transcript of a lecture by Alister McGrath regarding the rationality of faith. The two fit together well. In his lecture, McGrath notes that Dorothy Sayers once said that

detective fiction appeals to our deep yearning to discover patterns, to uncover secrets, and to impose order on what seem to some to be an unrelated series of events, yet to the initiated are the vital clues that lead to the solution of the mystery. . . .

Sayers, one of Britain’s most successful and talented detective novelists, argued that crime fiction was a powerful witness to our yearning to discover patterns, find meaning, and uncover hidden secrets. For Sayers, the detective novel appeals to our implicit belief in the intrinsic rationality of the world around us, and our ability to discover its deeper patterns. . .1

McGrath, the 2009 Drawbridge lecturer, further says that longing to make sense of things is not limited to crime fiction. He suggests that

The question being asked, whether in science or religion or detective fiction, is this: What greater picture unifies our disparate observations? How can the threads of evidence and observation be woven into a tapestry of truth? . . .
It is a vision that captivates the imaginations of many, and it still captivates mine. The ability of a theory – whether this is a detective’s attempt to makes sense of the evidence in a criminal case, or the more general human attempt to make sense of life . . . 2

I like what McGrath is saying because this vision also captivates my mind. I find that I am still seeking knowledge that will help me piece together the universe in which I live and help me find meaning. I hope that all of my life I will continue to ask the big questions of life: How did this universe come to be? What does science tell us about our world? What are the best theories on the mechanics of how this universe came into being? What does the Bible and theology tell us about purpose and meaning? How do we make sense of God, the Bible, and science? McGrath quotes Michael Polanyi (1891-1976), the Hungarian chemist who also explored the philosophical implications of the scientific method as saying, “The pursuit of discovery, . . . is guided by sensing the presence of a hidden reality toward which our clues are pointing.” May we always search for truth and never fear it; for all truth is God's truth. May we never lose the wonder of searching for reality. May we always be guided by the clues to the great truths of the universe.




McGrath, Alister E. "2009 Drawbridge Lecture." Shipoffools.com. November 12, 2009. http://shipoffools.com/features/2009/pdfs/ces_2009_drawbridge_lecture.pdf (accessed August 5, 2012).

1 (McGrath 2009)
2 (McGrath 2009)

Let's Get Small

No, I am not referring to the 1970s comedy routine by Steve Martin. This blog is about how we humans perceive ourselves in the universe. Who are we? How are we different from the other life forms on this planet (or other life forms in the universe)? What is our function in this world and what is the purpose of life?

It was so much simpler when we could think that our planet was at the centre of the universe, or even the centre of our solar system. But we no longer have that luxury. Observation of planetary bodies and the invention of the telescope mean that there is no turning back. Compared to the known universe, we are small.

This sort of reasoning leads many to question previously satisfying answers. A generation or two ago it was almost always assumed that behind all of the questions was a God who knew the answers and a God who cared about humankind as his crowning creation. That is certainly no longer the starting point of such conversations nor is it the common conclusion.

As we look at a diagram such as the one noted above, it is easy to see that we have come a long way in our understanding of the world in which we live. Perhaps the realm in which we continue to struggle is best represented by the word "why." Not "how" do things work. We have much knowledge and plenty of experiments to do to search for explanations about the workings of our bodies and of our universe. The real interesting questions are still out there. Why does the universe exist? Why does all of that "extra" space in our universe exist? Why do humans exist? Science and theology both seek to answer these ultimate questions of life and there is no necessary conflict between the answers provided by each discipline.

"Why" questions (or purpose questions) are often beyond the scope of scientific naturalism and experimentation . Lesslie Newbigin has said that "cause is something that can be discovered by observation and reason. Purpose is not available for inspection because, until the purpose has been realized, it is hidden in the mind of the one whose purpose it is." Who is behind the universe and why are we here are some of the most difficult questions which humans now face. The work to unravel these answers will require more effort than the largest scientific experiments of our time. And this work will take an eternity. It will require the work of our brightest minds and the collective effort of many people on the planet. Want to join in the conversation?

Click on the picture for a larger image or go here for the original source.

Self Reflective Faith

A few days ago I quoted Bradley Artson Shavit from a debate with Christopher Hitchens. In that same debate Rabbi Shavit noted that religion, like science, must be self-reflective. I would add that followers of a religion must constantly assess whether their understanding of God and faith fit with their experience of life. If we find a truth in the world we must reflect on how that truth fits into our understanding of the Bible. All truth - is God's truth. Alister McGrath makes a similar point in his book, Dawkins’ God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life.

For an orthodox Christian theologian, the doctrine of the Trinity is the inevitable outcome of intellectual engagement with the Christian experience of God; for the physicist, equally abstract and bewildering concepts emerge from wrestling with the world of quantum phenomena. But both are committed to sustained intellectual engagement with this phenomena, in order to derive and develop theories or doctrines which can be said to do justice to them, preserving rather than reducing them. Both the sciences and religion may therefore be described as offering interpretations of experience.*

We must not fear an understanding of faith which includes an understanding of science. Our understanding of life must include a thorough reading of the Bible and a thorough reading of God's other revelation: the universe.


*Alister McGrath, Dawkins’ God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life (Malden: Blackwell Publishing, 1998) , 88.

A Verdict in Spite of the Evidence

More brilliant insight from Alister McGrath.

There is no doubt that the debate over how we generate and justify our beliefs is immensely important . . . . In recent years, considerable attention has been paid to the way in which people sustain their belief systems. The evidence is disturbing, especially for those who continue to believe in the Enlightenment vision of complete objectivity of judgment in all things. Yet there is growing evidence that belief systems - whether theistic or atheistic - are neither generated nor sustained in this way.
Cognitive psychological research has demonstrated repeatedly that people "tend to seek out, recall, and interpret evidence in a manner that sustains beliefs." The interpretation of data is often deeply shaped by the beliefs of the researcher. These implicit beliefs are often so deeply held that they affect the way in which people process information and arrive at judgements. Both religious and anti-religious belief systems are often resistant to anything that threatens to undermine, challenge qualify, or disconfirm them. Deeply held assumptions often render these implicit theories "almost impervious to data."
Some Christian and Islamic writers seem unwilling to examine their deeply held beliefs, presumably because they are afraid that this kind of thing is bad news for faith. Well, maybe it is - for intellectually deficient and half-baked ideas. But it doesn't need to be like this. There are intellectually robust forms of faith - the kind of thing we find in writers such as Augustine of Hippo, Thomas Aquinas, and C. S. Lewis. They weren't afraid to think about their faith, and ask hard questions about its evidential basis, its internal consistency, or the adequacy of its theories.*

*Alister McGrath, Dawkins’ God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2007, p. 82, 83; with quotes from Richard E. Nisbett and Lee D. Ross, Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1980, p. 192, 169.

Science and Faith

I am again reading and writing on the interactions of science and faith. I have been reading Alister McGrath's book, Dawkins' God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life. Maybe one day I will write a book about my own journey relative to science and faith. It is an important topic and one that has always been part of the human story.

We must continually reassess our faith in light of the science of the day. Augustine of Hippo (354 to 430) discussed this in his Commentary on Genesis more than fifteen hundred years ago.

In matters that are so obscure and far beyond our vision, we find in Holy Scripture passages which can be interpreted in very different ways without prejudice to the faith we have received. In such cases, we should not rush in headlong and so firmly take our stand on one side that, if further progress in the search for truth justly undermines our position, we too fall with it. We should not battle for our own interpretation but for the teaching of Holy Scripture. We should not wish to conform the meaning of Holy Scripture to our interpretation, but our interpretation to the meaning of Holy Scripture.

God created a world too marvelous for us to fully comprehend. It should not surprise us that His ways of doing this are beyond our comprehension. Many words have been spoken, written, and argued regarding creation, science, design, evolution, and faith. Perhaps we must again hear the words of an ancient theologian and "not rush headlong and so firmly take our stand on one side that, if further progress in the search of truth justly undermines our position, we too fall with it."