Please watch these three YOUTUBE videos featuring a discussion about modern astrophysics and the different opinions of these three presenters:
Video Part 1:Part 2:
Part 3:
Stephen Hawkins-
Father Robert Spitzer-
Deepak Chopra-
Please Answer these questions:
1. What seemed to be the most interesting part of these discussions.
2. Please describe the viewpoint expressed by each of the presenters.
3. How do you think these opinions affect our society?
1. Hawkings said it is a human desire to know the broad picture, to put human life in perspective. All three speakers were attempting to answer the basic human question, “Why is there something rather than nothing?”
ReplyDelete2. Stephen Hawkings said that God may exist but we don’t need God to explain the universe. Science can explain the universe. The laws of physics, especially quantum theory, predict that something can spontaneously come from nothing. While the “Big Bang” occurred approximately thirteen billion years ago, the universe could have been created from other universes. He concluded that science progressively answers questions about the universe and once science is complete we will no longer need theology.
Father Spitzer was surprised by Hawkings current view, saying that in previous books Hawkings posed the question “what breathed fire into the laws of physics?” Father Spitzer said that if the universe had a beginning, nothing cannot create something so God must have created the universe. He argued that proposing other universes just pushes the problem. What created the other universes? He further argued that in our universe the laws of physics, if changed by even a small amount, would not produce stars, planets, and life, implying a unique creation.
Deepak Chopra agreed with Father Spitzer that something cannot come from nothing. He argued that the nothingness is the transcendent or mind that other religious traditions such as Buddhism believe in. Chropa challenged Hawkings view saying that it was arrogant to believe that science can ever answer anything.
3. People look for answers to justify their views of the world. Religious people will agree with Father Spitzer and Deepak Chropra’s views that current scientific knowledge is consistent with the belief in a transcendent God. On the other hand, atheists will agree with Hawking’s view that it is possible to propose a universe or universes that do not require a creator.
1. All three Speakers attempted to show how we came to be in this universe. how everything, the planets, the suns, the galaxies began.
ReplyDelete2. hawkings believed that there is an answer to how the universe came into being that could be explained without god. he does not say this is a proof that god doesnt exist, but he says the universe can exist through spontaneous act of the big bang and through physics.
Spitzer basically just said what religous people always say, which is what created the universe, something cannot come from nothing.
deepak agreed with spitzer and argued that the nothingness is the transcendent or mind that is talked about Buddhism
3. basically the religious people like to use fr. spitzer's argument to justify their ideals. hawking and people who respect the book in the way its supposed to be respected, simply use it as a tool to learn more.
1. The most interesting part to me is how they all believe in different theories in how the world was created and thought it was really interesting how Stephen believed the universe was created out of nothing into something.
ReplyDelete2. The viewpoint Stephen made was that God may exist but we dont need him to explain how the earth was created and how the earth works or how we are brought onto this planet. Father Spritzer argued against Stephen because he said there has to be something to create something nothing can just all of a sudden appear out of nothing. Deepak Chopra countered that argument by saying that something isn't created from nothing which i think that he is referring to God and was mad at Stephen how science is the answer to everything.
3. How these opinion effect our society is that people will believe whatever who they look up to and can alter peoples thinking on what they believe in very rationally throughout the world. This topic is very interesting and people believe in a lot of different things that effects the way we think.
1. Hawkings bases his that spirituality can leave questions unanswered, but science can't. Science is the ultimate answer. He has his views and the catholic church has theirs. Even though really challenged, stephen hawkings has done alot for the human race.
ReplyDelete2. Hawkings said that science can explain everything, so from that fact, the presence of a spiritual god to explain the universe is simply not needed or extra baggage. Father spitzer argues that nothing can come from nothing and that god was needed in the process for the creation. So obviously different ideas that contradict each other, but interesting points from both sides. Deepak Chopra leaned more towards to the idea that father spitzer that something can come from nothing but he talked about some mind ideas from the buddhism religion that i didn't really understand.
3. These opinions affect society because not everyone is a specialist in astrophysics and people look to these people to find answers to many questions about the human race. So the importance of their opinions correlates to the importance of their existence. People respect these peoples opinions and give them a chance in our society. Thats why they are important.
1. What seemed to be the most interesting part of these discussions.
ReplyDeleteThe most interesting part for me was watching Stephen Hawkins speak through his machine. I have studied him in other subjects, and never knew that he had a disease preventing him from talking. It is also interesting to see how he thinks there is no God.
2. Please describe the viewpoint expressed by each of the presenters.
Stephen Hawkings believes that there is a possibility that God may exist, but that science makes more sense. He believes that the "Big Bang" occurred because it is proven that something can exist and be made out of nothing.
Father Spitzer believes that God created the universe. Our universe is too complex to have been created by science. He argues that the universe needed a creator.
Deepak Chopra believes in the same theory as Father Spitzer, in that we had to have a creator to make our universe. He even called out Stephen Hawkins' original statement that science made everything, calling it conceited.
3. How do you think these opinions affect our society?
I think this affects many people's beliefs on how the world was created. For instance, if there was an undecided believer in God, and they decided to believe Stephen Hawkings, then they have closed a door in their life. If you stop believing that God made the universe, you most likely won't believe in God, and later in your life when you go through tough times you wont have someone to turn to.
1. What seemed to be the most interesting part of these discussions?
ReplyDeleteFor me, the most interesting part was how open ended these researchers left their answers. They never definitively stated whether God was apart of the universe or not. They merely stated their opinions and attached minor examples of why they felt the way they did. A more in depth conversation on the same topic would be interesting to view.
2.Please describe the viewpoint expressed by each of the presenters.
Stephen Hawkings believes that science can legitimately prove the creation of the universe without God. He does not count out the idea of God, but he states that science can explain creation. Leonard Mlodinow also believes that there is no definitive evidence that God was apart of creation. Father Spitzer views the something from nothing problem as an attack against those who believe that God was not apart of the equation. He believes that one must take into account that there might have been a creator and not discredit that possibility. Deepak Chopra believes that there is an omniscient being.
3. How do you think these opinions affect our society?
I think these open the minds of our society. If a person was to watch one of these videos, it would spark them to hopefully make their own opinions and do research on the subject. This makes for a more informed society.
1. I think it was interesting how Stephen Hawkings wouldn't give a direct answer when he was asked if he believed in God or not.
ReplyDelete2.Hawkings believed that M theory is the meaning of life. He believed that there may be a God but the universe was created with science. Father Spitzer believes that God created the universe. Deepak Chopra believes that God became the universe. He says that belief is a cover up of insecurity and knowledge of God is more important than the belief in God.
3. These opinions affect our society because there are many people with different beliefs. If someone truly believes something is true, it would be difficult to convince them to believe in something else. People who believe in God will agree with Father Spitzer's views. On the other hand, those who don't believe in God will favor Stephen Hawkings and Deepak Chopra's views.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1. I think the most interesting part of these discussions were the different point of views from each about how the universe was created. I was also not aware that Stephen Hawkins was diagnosed with the disability of being in a chair and only being able to speak through the computer. I thought it was interesting how he could answer the questions quickly and how he would not say if God did exist or not. I also thought it was awesome that Father Spitzer was on the videos because he is one of the priest as JSerra, and for him to represent the Catholic’s beliefs in such a good way.
ReplyDelete2. Stephen Hawkins stated that science could explain the creation of the universe without the help of a creator such as God. He believed that our universe could have come about from different universes. Father Spitzer believes that God created the universe and supports himself by saying that something cannot be created out of nothing. A creator or something is needed to create something and he disagrees with Stephen Hawkins. Deepak Chopra believes that nothing can not come from something otherwise agrees with Father Spitzer, but he also believes that there is has to be a creator in some way. He strongly disagreed with Stephen Hawkins by saying his idea of science explaining everything is "conceited".
3. These opinions affect our society because all these men have written books to influence you to believe their opinion. When these writers would write their books they would explain their proofs to sway you to believe their beliefs instead of your owns. Such as of someone read Stephen Hawkins book they could now not believe in God. It affects us on changing and informing the way people view ideas.
1. The part I found most interesting was on Stephen Hawking. Given the condition he is in, he has impacted world views on evolution and creation. I also found it interesting that he does not believe in God but he does not deny that there could be a God. Evolutionists have all these theories and so do people of the catholic church.
ReplyDelete2. Stephen Hawking believes in evolution and does not believe in God. He believes that the universe came from one bang of many different things. Father Spitzer believes that God did in fact create the universe and that nothing came from nothing, which he says needed a God to create it. Deepak Chopra agrees with Spitzer in the sense that there had to be a creator in order to create something out of nothing.
3. These opinions affect our society because they are all very knowledgable men. People will believe knowledgable men and just the fact that they were on tv, society pays attention to it. They also affect society through the books they have written where they would try and influence the reader to believe their ideas and/or theories about how the universe was created.
1. The most interesting part of the video to me was how they all believe in different theories in how the world was created and how Stephen believed the universe was created out of nothing and that he wouldn't state clearly whether he blieved in God or not.
ReplyDelete2. Mr. Hawkins viewpoint was that God may exist but we dont need him to explain how the earth was created and how the earth works or how we are brought onto this planet. Father Spritzer argued against Stephen because he said there has to be something to make something and nothing can just all of a sudden appear out of nothing. Deepak Chopra countered that argument by saying that something isn't created from nothing and was upset over Stephens view that science can explain to everything and that there is no other explaination.
3. How these opinion effect our society is that people will believe anything that gives them security. They believe the most cnvicing arguements and these statements can change their faith.
1. What was most interesting to me is how Hawkins says that god may exist but science can explain the universe without the need of a creator and how he spoke through the machine. It is really interesting to me how the machine works and how much technology was used to make it. It seems interesting how the machine speaks the words that Hawkins is trying to say and how it knows what to say. It is also very interesting how the three believed in different theories and how Hawkins wouldnt state whether he believed in god or not but yet says that there may be a god that exists.
ReplyDelete2. Steven Hawkins expresses how science can explain the universe without the need of a creator and expresses the fact that there is no need of god and how the universe was created by science. Father Spitzer expresses that God did create the universe and that nothing came from nothing and that our universe is too complex to be created by science. Deepak Chopra kinda agrees to Spitzer by stating that something isnt created by nothing and there had to be some type of creator.
3. I think these opinions affect our society because these people that spoke are very smart and know a lot, therefore people wont j=know what to believe, whether there was a creator or not or whether it was all science and would have us wondering about what is true.
1)I thought the most interesting part was when Father Spitzer talked about how all people want to know who we really are. Also how Father Spitzer is able to use science and religion as one whole and not one or the other.
ReplyDelete2)Stephen Hawkings' point of view was that God may exist but we don’t need God to explain the universe.
Father Spitzer and Deepak Chopra in a way had very similar viewpoints on the creation of the universe and also how science isn't relgion's enemy.
3)These different viewpoints affect our society by making it diverse. I think that its interesting cause each day everyone has some sort of interaction with others who sometimes don't agree with things such as relgion based off of theories just like those who believe in God. This in its self makes each day fun.
1. I thought it was very interesting how each person had different theories and beliefs about how the universe was created. It was really cool to see Stephen Hawkins talk about his beliefs despite his disability.It was fascinating to see how he could respond to a question so quickly through the computer. It was also very interesting to hear what Father Spitzer's thoughts were because he is one of the priests at Jserra. It was cool to see him illustrate Catholic beliefs in a very positive way.
ReplyDelete2. Stephen Hawkings was very open ended with his response. He said that there is a possibility that God may exist, but science could explain the creation of the universe without the help of a creator.
Father Spitzer believes that God created our universe. He states that the universe is too complex for science to be the creator. He supports his theory by saying that something is cannot be created out of nothing and a creator, such as God, needs to be involved.
Deepak Chopra is in an agreement with Father Spitzer. He also believes that the universe had to have been created by some type of creator. They both believe science and religion can work together.
3. These various outlooks affect our society because they allow people to have their own opinions. People can base their opinions off what these researchers say, which can make our society more diverse. These varying opinions also can affect peoples' religions. For example, religious people would probably agree with Father Spitzer and Deepak Chropra and oppose Stephen Hawking's beliefs. All of these different opinions open our minds to something new and makes us become aware of unfamiliar things.
1. I thought that it was interesting how Deepak Chopra, Fr. Spitzer, and Stephen Hawkins all could talk about their different theories and beliefs on how the universe was created. It also amazed me how Stephen Hawkins is able to communicate and discuss his beliefs despite his disabilities.
ReplyDelete2. Stephen Hawkins: Believes that there could be a God, but you don't need God to explain how the universe was created, science can explain it without religion
Deepak Chopra and Father Spitzer: They believe that there is a God that created the universe. They think that science and religion can be used together to explain and discuss the beginning of the universe.
3. These opinions affect our society because those that believe there is God will go with Fr, Spitzer and Deepak Chopra's theory of the beginning of the universe that science and religion work together to explain the beginning of the universe. People that don't believe in God and/or they are Atheist would go with Stephen Hawkin's theory that you do not need God to explain the universe. It all can be explained through science
1. The most interesting part of these discussions seemed to be the extreme differences between their beliefs. From believing God created everything to believing he had nothing to do with it at all was interesting to watch. It was also extremely interesting to watch Stephen Hawkings communicate, and talk about his beliefs and how he doesn't believe in God. I would never be able to live like he does without faith, without believing there was a reason for my disability and a purpose for my life. To live without God is to live without believing you have a purpose, how can someone so intelligent believe he has no purpose?
ReplyDelete2. Stephen Hawkings believes in the "big bang" and doesn't believe in God. He talks about how the universe was created with no intention for humans or human greatness. Father Spitzer believes that God created the universe, and he created us with a purpose and for a purpose. Deepak Chopra also believes that the universe has a creator, but he is not a catholic priest. Two of the three people believe that the universe has a creator who designed the earth with a purpose.
3. These opinions can affect our society by changing or supporting peoples beliefs. Father Spitzer and Deepak Chopra support the beliefs of people who are religious or believe in a creator, while Stephen Hawkings can create doubt in their minds. Hawkings can also support atheism, a growing group of people that don't believe in a religion. These opinions can change the beliefs of any kind of person for better, for worse, or just for different.
1) For me the most interesting part of this debate was how Stephan Hawkins was able to communicate by using his pupil to point to things on a computer screen. I didn't know things like this were even possible until viewing this video.
ReplyDelete2) Stephan Hawkins and Father Spitzer had very different view points on the creation of the earth. Stephan is an atheist who does not believe a God created the earth. He is under the belief of the universe being created from the big bang rather than from some godly being or force. Father Spitzer is obviously a religious man who believes in god. His understanding of the creation of the earth was that God created the earth.
3) I think these three views on the earths creation effect our society greatly. This is because when the common person is curious about larger than life questions we look to those with the most knowledge. In this case we can see three different views or answers for the same question. When society is put with multiple options we are forced to form our own opinions. This effects our society by letting the people create their own views based on what they see and hear from some of the most educated people on this topic.
1) By far the most interesting part of these videos was the fact that Stephan Hawkins writes words and talks by using his eyes. Only a true scientists and scholar can use extreme things like that. He is the man!
ReplyDelete2) Stephan Hawkins had a very interesting viewpoint on God and how the earth was created. He is a Atheist but his point of view was still very knowledgable and understanding. Father Spitzer, being the religious man that he is, belived that God created the earth.
3) Our society is affected by these three views in a major way. When one is confused about something or doesnt know and wants to learn more about something the look too the person who knows it for the answer. People create there own belifes and believe in what they want but they all look for influence in some way and these three significant people are influencial in society today
1) The most interesting part of the video was the different opinions they all had on how the universe was created and their beliefs in God. Another interesting part of the video was how Stephen Hawkins was able to communicate using his pupils and how the computer was able to read his pupils and pick words to help him communicate.
ReplyDelete2) Stephen Hawkins did acknowledge that God may exist but science can explain everything in our universe. Using the laws of physics and our knowledge of the beginning of the universe we can make logical explanations for everything in the universe.
Fr. Spitzer talked about how the universe had to be created by something and that something is God. Everything on Earth and in the universe had to be created by God.
Deepak Chopra agreed with Fr. Spitzer that something or someone had to have created everything and criticizes Hawkins for saying science can explain everything.
3) Fr. Spitzer and Deepka Chopra's answers represent the religious and faithfuls thoughts on how the universe and who created the universe. While Stephen Hawkins represents the scientific and atheists view on the universe.
Ryan Fitzpatrick
Delete1. The thing that was most interesting to me was really just how smart these men are on this subject, but how they all can disagree with one another on it. Another thing i found interesting was how Hawkings Communicated with Larry King through his machine, how his eyes can say what he is thinking is really cool, and it was interesting to me because i never knew stephen hawkings had this disease.
ReplyDelete2. Stephen Hawkings believes that the universe started from the big bang, and that it did not start from god, considering he is an athiest. Fr. Spitzer said that something can be made aout of nothing is very difficult to understand, which is why he believes that god created the universe and everything around us. Deepak Chopra said that the universe had to be created from something, that it couldnt start from nothing. He is not catholic but he still believes something created the universe.
3.These opinions affect our society because they are all from very smart and intelligible men. Two of the three men present religious thoughts on how the universe was created, while hawkings simply puts that the universe wasnt started from god but from a big bang. Because he is athiest some people choose not to believe him, although we should consider all of their opinions.
1. Their intelligence on the topics was mind boggling. Existence of God is such a controversial topic yet deepka supports all his ideas from concrete resources. His talk about the universe is so interesting in how he says that "God did not make the universe he is the universe." Each person's views on life and its relevance is very informative and interesting.
ReplyDelete2. Deepka talked about the universe and its historical background with its relevance towards God. Stevan Hawkings talks about that there could be no God when the earth was created. Although if there was a God, something had to create the God. Deepka says that the laws of nature are on in the book, no equation can make the universe work. Deepka says that there is no mathematical problem that can solve what happened in the creation. Father says that physics can not explain our human being. Yet Father only believes that people believe what they aren't sure about. This pertains to the belief of God and his connection to the universe's creation.
3. These opinions allow people to look at this idea from different positions. From Deepka's idea that mathematics can not define creation to Hawkings believing that mathematics proves all. Each opinion allows you to gain knowledge from each individual to formulate your own base to what you think on how creation began.
1. I was amazed that Hawkings didn't give a true answer when asked his religious beliefs, as he openly attacks God in most of his writing he cannot admit his beliefs.
ReplyDelete2. Deepka believes that creation came from something (God) as it cannot come from nothing and uses formulas to prove science cannot prove the big bang as it is only a theory. Hawkings believes that there is no divine being that created us as we came from an explosion of atoms and Fr. Spitzer explains how physics cannot explain creation, but we are given the answer through God.
3. Though I could be entirely wrong, I feel that Hawkings believes there is no God because of his physical condition, which creates strong emotion toward belief in a divine being if they let disease harm us again and again. As Fr. Spitzer tries to show that faith is the answer and Deepka appears to stand in the middle with his beliefs.
1. The most interesting aspect to me would have to be the differences between each individuals' viewpoints. Sometimes the viewpoints overlapped, and other times all of the speakers completely disagreed. It was interesting to see the similarities and differences on the various topics.
ReplyDelete2. Fr. Spitzer discusses how answers are revealed to us through God, but also explains that physics are logical; however cannot explain creation. Deepka explains his belief that the big bang theory really is only a theory and even though he does not necessarily say that we were created by God, he states that we had to have come from something because we could not have been created from nothing. Hawkings believes that something had to create God and there could not have been simply nothing before Him.
3. Different perspectives are always valuable. Different people can offer ideas that you might have never even considered. Whether it's Hawking's strict belief and loyalty to science, Deepka's belief that everything has to come from something, or Fr. Spitzer's belief that God is the only logical answer; these opinions all have individual value.
1. The most interesting part in the videos were that there were so many different opinions about the belief of creation. From beliving in God to having complete faith in science, all their opinions varied. Each opinion holding value.
ReplyDelete2. Hawking's believe was very strict toward science. He revealed that he holds all faith in science rather than God, His beliefs and opinions only go off of what science can prove. Whereas on the other hand Fr. Spitzer, have full faith that God is the only realistic answer to creation. Although he recognizes what the findings of physics has to offer, his faith is solely in God being the creator. Deepka is inbetween belief soley in God and soley in science. He does not know which is true but has both sides in his opinion. All of these men's opinions are valuable to topic of creation.
3. All these different opinions affect our society because they offer varies ideas and aspects of the topic of creation that members of society have not explored previously.
1. I think the most interesting part of these discussions were the different point of views from Stephen Hawking and Father Spitzer about how the universe was created. I thought it was interesting how he could answer the questions without refering to God, and yet time started at a single point. I also thought it was interesting that Father Spitzer, whos a priest as JSerra, is able to debate Hawking, one of the greatest minds of this century and for him to represent the Catholic’s beliefs in science.
ReplyDelete2. Stephen Hawkins stated that science could explain the creation of the universe without the help of a creator. He believed that our universe could have come about from different universes. Father Spitzer believes that God created the universe and supports himself by saying that something cannot be created out of nothing, that time started at a definate point, and a creator is needed to create something. Deepak Chopra believes that nothing can not come from something, which parallels views with father Spitzer. He strongly disagreed with Stephen Hawkins by saying his idea of science explaining everything is "conceited".
3. These opinions affect our society because all these men have written books to influence you to believe their opinion, and they are some of the greatest minds in our generation. Such as of someone read Stephen Hawkins book they could now not believe in God.