The question of Meaning. Between the anthropic principle and Orthodox Teleology

1. Entity type Lemma
2. Original titleLa question du sens. Entre le principe anthropique et la téléologie orthodoxe
3. Language term French
4. lemma author Delli, Eudoxie
5. lemma category Co-existence - Scientific theories and disciplines > Cosmology- Anthropic principle - Scientific theories and disciplines > Artificial intelligence - Concepts of knowledge and modes of reasoning > Orthodox gnosiology - Concepts of knowledge and modes of reasoning
6. Publication date 30-1-2017
7. lemma work Ionescu, Razvan Andrei [Author]. The question of Meaning. Between the anthropic principle and Orthodox Teleology
8. lemma manifestations Science et Religion
9. Keywords Weak Anthropic Principle - Strong Anthropic Principle - Intelligent Design - The God Hypothesis - divine logoi of beings - Phillips, William D. - Demaret, Jacques - Lambert, Dominique - Staune, Jean
10. Url Click Here
11. Citations
    1. <p>Ionescu, R. A. (2014). <em>La question du sens. Entre le principe anthropique et la téléologie orthodoxe. </em>Retrieved from <a href="http://www.science-et-religion.fr/cat-univers/54-la-question-du-sens-entre-le-principe-anthropique-et-la-teleologie-theologique">http://www.science-et-religion.fr/cat-univers/54-la-question-du-sens-entre-le-principe-anthropique-et-la-teleologie-theologique</a></p>
12. Lemma body

    1. Fr Ionescu deals with the notion of the anthropic principle. He quotes and comments relevant views expressed by modern scientists on this controversial issue, in an attempt to correlate it with the Orthodox teleology.

       According to the author, the anthropic principle evokes the emergence of a conscience through which Universe is perceived as an intelligent being- in the macroscopic level or in the level of the infinitesimally small and the infinitesimally large.

       Fr Ionescu recognizes that the anthropic principle has raised many significant doubts about its scientific reliability. As he mentions, on the one hand, there are many scientists who reject the scientific character of anthropic principle, as they refuse to accept the teleological approach and they believe that the only purpose of the anthropic principle is to satisfy our curiosity about phenomena which are not yet scientifically explained. On the other hand, there are others who see in the anthropic principle the possibility for a scientific discourse more open to the question of meaning, and as the meeting point between Theology and Science because it reintegrates the human factor in Physics and overpass the deterministic views of Modernity.

       The author conisiderst the anthropic principle as a notion originated from the scientific world, but it re-opens the question of meaning and finality. He doesn’t accept the approach according to which the anthropic principle and the Intelligent Design are the two basic expressions of the same teleological argument, because the Intelligent Design has a rather ideological character, while the anthropic principle is a scientific concept, elaborated by theological or philosophical reflection. At that point, Ionescu exposes the thesis of Jean Staune who underlines that the Intelligent Design indicates that the Creator violated the laws of the Universe in order to create life, while the anthropic principle proposes that the laws and the initial conditions of Universe allow the hypothesis of the existence of a Creator. This is why the atheist or non-believer scientists deny the scientific validity of the anthropic principle, while the believers recognize in it analogies with the doxological and finalist approach of the Creation proper in Theology.

       The last part of Fr Ionescu’s text concerns the theological teleology, which is identified to the Revelation of God’s Grace and His work in the eyes of the human. He clarifies that, although the scientific teleology interacts with the theological teleology, it is impossible to confuse them as there is a clear distinction between them. The scientific reflections on the question of finality can stimulate the teleological research of theological order, but the introduction of scientific arguments within Theology cannot make theology credible in the eyes of the atheists and be used as an apology for its proper consistency. According to the author, only a spiritual intelligence, led by God’s Grace, could reveal the spiritual reasons (logoi) of the created world. The author concludes by referring to Fr Dumitru Staniloae and to his conception of a spiritual intelligence -inspired by the Patristic thought and based on purification and conversion (metanoia)- which can apprehend the invisible forces of which the world is made.