Last month, Jonathan Pararajasingham created a montage of 50 renowned academics, including many Nobel prize winners, talking about their thoughts on the existence of God. And boy did it generate some debate. (Watch the video and read the comments here.) Now comes Part II, which features George Lakoff, Richard Dawkins, Simon Schaffer, Patricia Churchland, and Michio Kaku, among others. The full list appears below the jump. (Click “more.”) You can find this video, along with the first video in the series, in our collection of Great Science Videos.
51. Frank Wilczek, Nobel Laureate in Physics, MIT
52. VS Ramachandran, World-Renowned Neuroscientist, UC San Diego
53. Bruce C. Murray, Caltech Professor Emeritus of Planetary Science
54. Sir Raymond Firth, World-Renowned Anthropologist, LSE
55. Alva Noë, Berkeley Professor of Philosophy
56. Alan Dundes, World Expert in Folklore, Berkeley
57. Massimo Pigliucci, Professor of Philosophy, CUNY
58. Bede Rundle, Oxford Professor of Philosophy
59. Sir Richard Friend, Cambridge Professor of Physics
60. George Lakoff, Berkeley Professor of Linguistics
61. Sir John Sulston, Nobel Laureate in Physiology/Medicine
62. Shelley Kagan, Yale Professor of Philosophy
63. Roy J. Glauber, Nobel Laureate in Physics
64. Lewis Wolpert, Emeritus Professor of Biology, UCL
65. Mahzarin Banaji, Harvard Professor of Social Ethics
66. Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Professor of Practical Ethics, Duke University
67. Richard Dawkins, Oxford Evolutionary Biologist
68. Bruce Hood, Professor of Experimental Psychology, Bristol
69. Marvin Minsky, Artificial Intelligence Research Pioneer, MIT
70. Herman Philipse, Professor of Philosophy, Utrecht University
71. Michio Kaku, CUNY Professor of Theoretical Physics
72. Dame Caroline Humphrey, Cambridge Professor of Anthropology
73. Max Tegmark, World-Renowned Cosmologist, MIT
74. David Parkin, Oxford Professor of Anthropology
75. Robert Price, Professor of Theology and Biblical Criticism
76. Jonathan Haidt, Professor of Psychology, Virginia
77. Max Perutz, Nobel Laureate in Chemistry
78. Rodolfo Llinas, Professor of Neuroscience, New York
79. Dan McKenzie, World-Renowned Geophysicist, Cambridge
80. Patricia Churchland, Professor of Philosophy, UC San Diego
81. Sean Carroll, Caltech Theoretical Cosmologist
82. Alexander Vilenkin, World-Renowned Theoretical Physicist
83. PZ Myers, Professor of Biology, Minnesota
84. Haroon Ahmed, Prominent Cambridge Scientist (Microelectronics)
85. David Sloan Wilson, Professor of Biology and Anthropology, SUNY
86. Bart Ehrman, Professor of Religious Studies, UNC
87. Seth Lloyd, Pioneer of Quantum Computing, MIT
88. Dan Brown, Fellow in Organic Chemistry, Cambridge
89. Victor Stenger, Emeritus Professor of Physics and Astronomy, Hawaii
90. Simon Schaffer, Cambridge Professor of the History of Science
91. Saul Perlmutter World-Renowned Astrophysicist, Berkeley
92. Lee Silver, Princeton Professor of Molecular Biology
93. Barry Supple, Emeritus Professor of Economic History, Cambridge
94. Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Professor of Law
95. John Raymond Smythies, Professor Emeritus of Psychiatric Research
96. Chris Hann, Max Planck Institute For Social Anthropology
97. David Gross, Nobel Laureate in Physics
98. Ronald de Sousa, Emeritus Professor of Philosophy, Toronto
99. Robert Hinde, Emeritus Professor of Zoology, Cambridge
100. Carolyn Porco, NASA Planetary Scientist
I cannot imagine any religious person of ANY religion, after watching and listening to these 100 thoughtful men, retaining their “faith”without question.
(But, of course, they WILL!)
It is clear than more than 90% of the scientific community believes that the existence of the Universe (or Universes) are the result of acts of randomness and purely accidental. If the Universe (or Universes) is endless and infinite does everything exists? It would be very interesting if Mr. Pararajasingham can put together either these group of scientists ( or other renowned academics) to talk about their opinion of such issues including “cause and effect”. Since there is no First Cause why do we almost automatically try (and succeed quite often) to understand as to the “why” (the reason behind it) of everything. Is there always a cause for everything BUT a First Cause? In a purely material existence shouldn’t the words “why” and “cause” (and “because” also) be then completely eliminated? Shouldn’t the word “how” be used instead?
Actually, Raul Martinez-Estevez, your claim that “It is clear than more than 90% of the scientific community believes that the existence of the Universe (or Universes) are the result of acts of randomness and purely accidental” is dead wrong.
If you’d attempted to use your Reason to actually do some research, instead of blathering your opinions as though they were fact, you might’ve stumbled across one of the many surveys that’ve found most scientists DO believe in God.
The PEW Research Center’s survey found that “51% of scientists believed in God or a ‘higher power’” (7% didn’t claim atheism or belief): http://www.pewforum.org/Science-and-Bioethics/Scientists-and-Belief.aspx
Others have found higher rates of belief. Like this one that found “About two-thirds of scientists believe in God”: http://www.livescience.com/379-scientists-belief-god-varies-starkly-discipline.html
It’s rather embarrassing–in a humorous way–when atheists claiming to be champions of reason don’t bother to use it.
The fact that so many scientists are atheists or agnostics many merely be due to the way they are selected. If religious scientists are not given positions, the result is obvious.
What is the purpose of this and how are these scientists selected? Even if it is true that most scientists are not deistic, it could also be inferred that religious and deist believing scientists are not given tenor.