Thursday, March 13, 2008

Big win for Cosmologist-Priest

Priest-Cosmologist Wins $1.6 Million Templeton Prize


Here's something that must be pissing off the "A" crowd:

...The $1.6 million Templeton Prize, the richest award made to an individual by a philanthropic organization, was given Wednesday to Michael Heller, 72, a Roman Catholic priest, cosmologist and philosopher who has spent his life asking, and perhaps more impressively answering, questions like “Does the universe need to have a cause?”

I hear a collective grown over at Sciencblogs, heh:

...Michael Heller, 72, winner of this year’s prize. He says science and religion “are prerequisites of the decent existence...”

Well said. I like the concept of 'decent existence'. That's something to live up to. I wish more people were like this man. He is one of a growing number of science positive thinkers who are also deeply spiritual:

...Much of Professor Heller’s career has been dedicated to reconciling the known scientific world with the unknowable dimensions of God. Professor Heller said he believed, for example, that the religious objection to teaching evolution “is one of the greatest misunderstandings” because it “introduces a contradiction or opposition between God and chance.” In a telephone interview, Professor Heller explained his affinity for the two fields: “I always wanted to do the most important things, and what can be more important than science and religion? Science gives us knowledge, and religion gives us meaning. Both are prerequisites of the decent existence...”

2 comments:

The Wiccan Scientist said...

Although I left Catholicism many years ago, I have to cheer Professor Heller's work. I have long maintained there is no conflict between science and religion, any religion, and that any conflict was merely between science and the minds of men.

Congratulations to the Professor for his good work.

genexs said...

Thanx for your comment. I'm in agreement with you about the contrived conflict between science and religion.

Btw, I thought your theory about the surface of Venus (with it's lack of cratering) was interesting.

best,
Gene