by Paul Anlee
“We don’t need a God or gods in order to understand the universe, though it may be beyond the intelligence of unaided, individual humans. No, what we need is to elevate the level of intelligence in humans so that we can all better understand the universe. Although it is vast, majestic, and complex—and we might not be able to understand every little thing that happens within—it is still a natural universe with natural laws. It can be understood.
“We used to think God moved the planets and put the stars in their place in the sky. Then Newton and Einstein helped us to see that astronomy was explained by gravity, and our magical explanations of the universe retreated to the realm of biology.
“We used to invoke godly ‘vital spirits’ to explain the animation of life and inheritance. But Darwin showed that inheritance along with competition to survive and reproduce could explain the development of new species. Then Watson, Crick, and Franklin, among others, showed that DNA was the basis of inheritance, and it became obvious that biology was really just complex chemistry.
“We used to think that life could not have spontaneously begun in the primordial ooze that was Earth. And then, just a few years ago, Barholt showed us how life can spring from wet, salty puddles, with no other explanation than chemistry and thermodynamics.
“Our God-based rationalizations have steadily retreated as scientific theories of natural phenomena have advanced. Today, God is mostly only invoked within the scientific community to explain the existence of the human soul and the creation of the universe.
“I’m certain that advances made in artificial intelligence over the next few years, perhaps by someone in this room today, will challenge the magical explanation of the human soul.
“Very soon we will be able to create the software that will show intelligence is an emergent property of organized, neural-like systems, whether those neurons are biological, electronic, or spintronic. I predict that within a hundred years we will develop synthetic intelligences whose humanity we will be unable to deny.
“Even the very laws of nature are close to becoming something we can manipulate through science and technology. The work being done by my group will show these physical laws have a perfectly natural origin, that no magical or supernatural explanation is required to explain them.
“The theory we are developing will point the way to a deeper understanding of how our natural laws evolved among the original bits of the universe. It will give us a chance to vary these laws in a small, local section of the universe, and see how different sets of natural laws interact. This work could lead the way to some major breakthroughs: limitless energy, smarter computers, faster-than-light travel to places that only our distant descendants will know.
“Personally, I find a universe that evolved naturally is much more exhilarating than a universe created by an all-powerful being to celebrate His glory. I would hope that the rest of you would find it equally exciting.”
To Darian’s surprise, applause broke out among about a third of the audience members. The remainder sat, frowning, with crossed arms and disapproving glares.
“Ahem,” Dr. Pratt broke in after a few seconds. “I see we have exceeded the time allowed for the first half of the Café. We’ll take one more question before the break and then enjoy a fifteen-minute recess.
Pratt scanned the room looking for the last questioner. He pointed to an older gentleman sitting halfway back in the lecture theater, whose hand was barely raised. “Yes, you, sir, the gentleman in the striped shirt,” he said and directed one of the floor runners to deliver a microphone to the selected audience member.
Darian waited patiently as the man fiddled with the microphone. The clumsy collusion between the host and the planted questioner could not have been clearer if he had received a script in advance of the Café.
“Reverend LaMontagne,” Darian announced for the benefit of anyone who might not have recognized the former statesman and church leader being invited to speak. “I was wondering if you might weigh in on the discussion. Welcome.”
The Reverend was only moderately surprised at being recognized by the professor. The holy man’s reputation was much larger in The New Confederacy than in Pacifica. Still, his vocal support of a fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible, and of its use in government and education, led to his image appearing in many news stories across popular media around the English-speaking world.
“Thank you for a most interesting presentation, Dr. Leigh,” LaMontagne began. “I only have two very brief questions for you, if I may. First, I’d like to know what you think is the purpose of it all. Why, of all possible universes, was this one, which is so attuned to human life, the one that came into existence? Second, without the guiding hand of our Lord and His son, Jesus Christ, how are we to know right from wrong? Thank you.” He handed the microphone back to the waiting assistant.
“Short questions frequently lead to long answers,” replied Darian. “But I’m sure everyone would like to get to the refreshments and the restrooms so I’ll try to keep it brief, and if anyone cares to continue, we can discuss it further during or after the break.
“Your first question, why this world, and what is the purpose of it all, alludes to an anthropocentric view of the universe and of our Earth. Some people believe everything was designed for the optimal existence of life or, more precisely, of mankind. From this perspective, inevitably follows the argument that, because this is the only human-friendly planet we know, it must have been created by God expressly for humanity. This belief seems to have plagued a great many philosophers and even a few physicists over the past several hundred years. Unfortunately, it is based on a faulty assumption.
“The vast majority of the universe, and of the potentially habitable part of this planet, is actually not amenable to life, certainly not to human life. Indeed, it is quite hostile. Most of the universe is what we think of as empty; it’s in a vacuum flooded with various wavelengths of radiation, including light.
“The anthropocentric argument would carry a lot more weight if humans or other intelligent life were found throughout space or even inside the stars, since they comprise much more volume than Earth-like planets.
“If the universe had been at all intelligently designed for the purpose of life and of humans, it would have made much more sense to increase the habitable surface area by breaking the planets into smaller pieces, like asteroids. However, the weak gravity of asteroid-sized planetoids is insufficient to hold air or water on the surface, and so life becomes restricted to the planets.
“Even on Earth, life inhabits only a thin layer along the surface; it does not infiltrate most of the available volume. Life is only suited for extremely specialized environments found in an extremely small percent of the universe.
“If one wanted to claim that God created this vast universe but only placed life and humanity on the thinnest layer of a single inconsequential planet going round a nondescript star near the edge of an unremarkable galaxy among the hundreds of billions of galaxies in this part of the universe just so that we'd know our importance to Him, that is a very different claim from the anthropocentric one.
“If that were the case, then God would have had to think humans exceptionally vain and stupid to require such an enormous waste of space just to bring home a simple point.
“As for the purpose of it all, when I make something—let's say I build a house—I assign it a rationale. It could be to shelter me, to sell for money, or so on. Its purpose is given by its creator, me, in this case.
“Your first question assumes the universe has a Creator, who built it for His own purpose. If the universe simply evolved from the chaos that preceded it, it has no intrinsic purpose given by a nonexistent Creator. It simply is.
“Now, can we, as intelligent beings, decide on living our lives with purpose? Sure. We’re able to decide what skills and talents we have, what we like and dislike, what meaning we attach to our activities. As well, we have a wide variety of societ
al and cultural influences to help us decide how to build our lives with purpose. We decide our purpose, each individual for him or her own self.
“Which brings me to your second question: How are we to know right from wrong? There are many moralities possible without God. Secular humanists and moral philosophers of many stripes have addressed this issue for centuries.
“Moral codes, a sense of right and wrong, pre-existed Christianity, and even the Old Testament. Christianity overlaid many of its practices and celebrations onto the earlier pagan worship and events.
“The fact that societies without the Christian God, or any gods at all for that matter, were capable of arriving at moral codes not too different from those of the Old or New Testaments would suggest that morality may have other bases besides the Christian God. We don't have time to go into evolutionary sociobiology here today, but many scholars have written about it.
“Instead, I’d like to suggest that the universe encodes moral laws just as much as it encodes physical laws. Universal moral laws apply more so to the species as a whole rather than to isolated individuals
“The fact that there are biologically unbreakable moral laws at the species level is as evident as the physical laws that we readily accept. One example might be: ‘Thou shall not eat all your young.’ Clearly, this law cannot be broken by all members of any mortal, sexually-reproducing species if that species is to survive. Just as one cannot jump off a cliff in defiance of the law of gravity, all members of a species cannot defy the moral law, ‘thou shall not eat all thy young,’ and survive.
“Notice how nature enforces moral law. When moral law is broken by a critical number of a species, that species becomes extinct. The physical punishment for breaking a natural moral law is much harsher than that of eternal damnation in a burning hell specified by Christianity. It is the subsequent non-existence of the species.
“Natural moral laws are similar to the laws of quantum mechanics in many ways. At the subatomic scale, individual particles are capable of all kinds of strange behaviors that seem to break the laws of nature.
“Take electron tunneling, for example. An electron seems to jump across an insulating barrier. One instant, it’s on one side of the barrier; and the next instant, it’s on the other side without ever traveling through the barrier. It appears to defy natural laws of motion.
“But, as I mentioned earlier, in the aggregation of all these particles into larger-scale lumps of matter, things that we can hold in our hands, those many small-scale oddities average out and matter ‘behaves’ itself.
“All kinds of behavior might be possible for individual members of a species but, if that species’ aggregate behavior deviates too far from the limits tolerated by nature, the species cannot survive.
“Other examples of natural moral law might go something like, ‘Thou shall not contaminate your environment to uninhabitable levels,’ or ‘Thou shall not overly limit diversity.’ The first of these is rather obvious, but the second one is very interesting.
“Nature needs genetic diversity in a species because the environment is unpredictable. Levels of moisture, available food sources, changing light levels, and so on, mean that no species is ever completely safe from their environment because environments are not stable.
“The way that species adapt to change, in an evolutionary sense, is to encode variability right into their DNA. Individual members of any species are slightly different from other members. As an environment changes, some members will be better able to adapt to the change than others. In biology, we say these traits are selected but, really, we mean that some of the variations are more suitable than others. So nature says species must be capable of adapting or they run the risk of becoming extinct.
“How does this apply to us as individuals? It turns out that nature does not care too much about individual members of any species except as they may contribute to the survival of the species as a whole. However, as individuals of an intelligent species, we can choose to synchronize our individual behaviors with behaviors that are important to the species as a whole. We can attend to the needs of our young; we can be responsible shepherds of our environment; we can develop diverse skills and talents; and we can appreciate diversity in others, even if we don’t like their behavior very much.
“Does any of this require an overarching God to threaten us with punishment if we stray? No, not at all. Nature will deal our species the ultimate punishment, non-existence, if we are immoral—that is, if we behave contrary to the types of behavior that select for survival of an intelligent species.
“Children require the guidance of an adult to help them select and practice behaviors that fit with survival over the long term. We learn to share, to cooperate, and to care about the well-being of our fellow humans. Much of infant behavior is directed and guided by their ‘omnipotent’ parents. But there comes a time when we develop the ability to think rationally, to reason on our own about right and wrong. We no longer need the threat of punishment to determine what kinds of behaviors are good for us and what kinds are bad.
“If as a society—as a species—we can learn to become aware of the behaviors that are good for our species over the long term, we can begin to take steps to select good behaviors from bad ones without needing the threat of eternal punishment. We no longer need the idea of a God or gods to choose good behaviors.
“I believe that it is time for humanity to grow up, to claim its adulthood, and to begin taking conscious responsibility for its future development.”
LaMontagne leaned forward, itching to launch a rebuttal. To his dismay, his opportunity to reply was drowned out by thunderous applause. Much of the crowd rose to its feet and enthusiastic hoots rose from both theaters. Darian took it all in, surprised by the response.
One spectator, despite remaining seated, stood out; it was the same man who had been fuming through the entire talk. His face was contorted with fury; his chest heaved in ragged and uneven breaths.
Throughout the talk, the man had been holding his hands clenched tightly at his sides. His slightly overweight frame looked like it had once been muscular and well-toned; a certain hardness underlay the soft exterior. Years of military training and discipline—Darian guessed.
Unable to restrain himself any longer, the man’s right hand slid slowly and deliberately across his body and disappeared under the vest. When it reappeared, it held a large pistol.
29
The first shot went into the ceiling. Someone yelped, and the shooter drew a broad arc through the crowd. “Everyone, sit down and shut up! I don’t want to hear a word out of anybody. Not one word.”
Darian transmitted an urgent notice from his lattice to the local police broadnet.
The man fixed his sight on Darian, and made his way into the stairway leading toward the podium. “Darian Leigh, you have blasphemed against the Lord God and His only son, Yeshua! You have set the false idol of science before us. You have attempted to turn our gaze away from His loving face and toward your own.”
As he made his way down the stairs, the shooter’s hand bobbed and swayed a little with each step. Darian contemplated dashing for the door. He’s far enough away. I’d be hard to hit with a handgun. He realized that running would likely put the entire auditorium at risk. I have to draw his fire.
Training his eye firmly on the man’s trigger finger, the young professor subtly echoed the sway, side to side in rhythm with the assailant’s steps, minutely amplifying the motion each time. He hoped to lure the man into increasing the sway, making it harder for him to maintain an aim on Darian’s chest.
If I can get him to fire on an outward sway from at least twelve or more meters away, I can reverse my own movement and get up to a seventy percent chance of dodging the bullet. His calculations had to incorporate a lot of assumptions about the man’s training, response time, and how many shots he could fire before someone stopped him. All this computing power, and it comes down to hunches and guess
work.
Darian fought to remain calm.
Internally, he raced through his lattice archives for teachings of Yeshua’s True Guard Church. If I can get this guy angry enough to fire off a sloppy shot before he gets any closer, I might have a chance. I have to get all his attention on me. Maybe someone in the crowd can stop him before he gets off a second shot. Or a third.
“You, sir, are the blasphemer!” Darian shouted. The man stopped in his tracks and stared at the scientist.
Playing up his indignation, Darian grabbed the lapel microphone from his collar and threw it to the ground. The speakers squealed as it bounced off the tile floor. He kept his eyes locked on the man’s trigger finger and broadcasted his next words directly from his lattice into the PA system, hoping the unaided amplification might further rattle the man.
“You have entered a House of Knowledge with a closed mind, arrogantly sure of your fairy tales and your false god.”
It didn't take a lattice to see the man's surprise return to rage and disgust. Darian slowed his side-to-side rocking, and prepared to twist away the instant the trigger was pulled.
The man’s lips stretched into a smile as if recognizing a familiar face. He continued his descent toward the podium. “Ah, Satan speaks through you, I see,” he bellowed, “but Yeshua has shown us the way. ‘I am the light and the glory,’ He says. ‘There is no path to heaven but to follow me.’ It will be a great service to the Lord, when I rid you of the demon that haunts you, Darian Leigh, when I free your soul from the Prince of Lies.”
The gunman’s spare hand produced a silver cross from the breast pocket of his vest. “I cast thee out, Satan,” he cried. “In the name of Yeshua, son of God, I command thee to depart from this man. Lift the veil of darkness from his eyes so that he may see the true light of our Divine Lord and find his soul in peace.”
