Can we trust Scientists?

Spent an hour or so in the BBC radio Solent studio this morning discussing the question "Can we trust scientists?" with Steve Harris. I felt it went quite well and rather enjoyed it! I've stuck a edited recording on the following link:

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~rmhasek/radio/BigConvo_Science_May11.mp3

Why is there suffering in the world?

My daily thoughts on BBC radio Solent this week are about something that has been concerning me a lot recently - why is there pain and suffering in the world? Although I don't think I have an answer, I have found some things helpful when thinking about this question.

Click on the link for the recording, text pasted below.

Tuesday 26th April
Wednesday 27th April
Thursday 28th April
Friday 29th April

Day 1

Earlier this month it was announced that Lord Rees, the astronomer royal and recent president of the Royal Society, had been awarded the 1 million pound Templeton prize for making “exceptional contributions to affirming life's spiritual dimension”. This quickly provoked a vitriolic response from well-known atheist scientists such as Richard Dawkins and Harry Kroto, the latter referring to spirituality as “congenital wishful thinking”.  However interestingly, as I have been following this story over the last couple of weeks, I’ve actually found more articles critical of Dawkins and Kroto, than articles surprised that a famous scientist finds spirituality important.

I think this is because people are beginning to tire of the rhetoric that says science and spirituality are opposites or incompatible. I am a scientist who happens to think that science is one of the most important activities that humans engage in, however I do not think it provides the only lense through which we see life. Take for instance the recent earth-quake and Tsunami in Japan. Science provides excellent explanations for why these natural disasters happen and indeed why they must happen in order for there to be life on this planet. Science can even get a certain distance in explaining a bit about the human tragedy - perhaps why people live in such places and why we react the way we do when disaster strikes. However seeing a disaster just in terms of plate tectonics, fluid dynamics, sociology or psychology seems cold and callous. Yes of course the rationality provided by science is important, however when faced with unspeakable human tragedy we need the comfort and hope provided by faith, religion and spirituality far more than we need any textbook of physics.

Day 2

As a child I really enjoyed the Andrew Lloyd Webber musical “Joseph and the amazing Technicolour Dreamcoat”. Of course, along with the fun songs, this musical is memorable for telling the biblical story of Joseph - a young boy who is sold into slavery by his brothers before a series of adventures results in him becoming the powerful governor of Egypt. In this position he successfully predicts the coming of a famine and is able to oversee the storage of grain so that Egypt does not suffer the effects of this natural disaster. The story finishes with a happy ending when Joseph is reconciled with his brothers after they come pleading for help because of the effects of the famine.

The story of Joseph is an exciting, feel-good, rags to riches tale. It is particularly alluring because it reminds us that no matter how bad things might seem there is always the possibility – the hope – of future success and happiness. Interestingly, in the case of Joseph, personal qualities or planning only contribute a very small part to his success because the main events seem to be engineered by God who has a much bigger plan in mind. The story of Joseph is thus powerful because it reminds us that even apparently hopeless situations do unexpectedly turn to good through causes that are beyond our control. In a small way I find this quite a comforting thought - knowing that however bad or confusing a situation might be, everything doesn’t depend entirely upon me, there are other forces at work, and there is a much bigger picture that often I simply cannot see.

Day 3

Perhaps one of the most unfortunate characters of all time was a bloke called Job. He was a wealthy landowner in the middle-east with seven sons, three daughters, many servants, oxen, camels and flocks of sheep. However, during the course of just 24 hours his children are killed, his animals destroyed, he catches a terrible disease and his wife first mocks and then deserts him. These misfortunes kick off one of the earliest recorded philosophical exchanges as a number of his friends gather to discuss what he had done wrong to be so unfortunate, and what he should do to fix the situation. But, after a 15,000-word dialogue Job and his friends are still at a loss to explain why suffering occurs in the world. At this point God enters the conversation: “Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation? Tell me, if you understand. 
Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! Who stretched a measuring line across it? On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone?” God reminds Job and his friends that they are only men with a very limited understanding.

I find it funny how many people think that being religious means thinking that you have all the answers.  This is not my experience. Instead for me Christianity is not really about answers, but rather about stories that help me come to terms with both the world and myself. The stories in the bible are not there to tell us what to do, but rather to provide guidance for how to approach and think about problems. Today’s example, the story of Job, reminds us that we are limited beings and in fact cannot know everything – something that we certainly need to be reminded in this current age of science and technology.

Day 4

I found the events in Japan on March 11th truly shocking. I watched with absolute horror the television footage of the Tsunami overtaking cars, smashing buildings, swallowing up farmland and destroying lives. This event reminded me that no matter how sophisticated humans become, we are still at the mercy of natural forces that are simply beyond our control. It is interesting to note, however, that although the earthquake in Japan was stronger than the one in Haiti a year ago, there were only a couple deaths in Japan from the actual earthquake whilst 316 thousand people died in poverty stricken Haiti. Similarly the early warning systems in Japan saved many thousands of lives, so that compared to the 230 thousand people who died in the 2005 Boxing Day Tsunami, the Japanese death toll has actually been an order of magnitude lower. These statistics suggest to me that along with uncontrolled natural forces, poverty and injustice also play a very large role in these terrible disasters.

As a Christian I do not believe that the bible gives us an answer to suffering, but it does tell us some stories that help us come to terms with what we find around us. The story of Joseph reminds us that bigger plans are often at work, the story of Job tells us that we cannot always expect to understand why things happen, and the story of Jesus tells us that we have a duty to care for the poor and come alongside those who are suffering. It is for these reasons – these stories – that I think spirituality and religion are extremely important and do contribute to our lives in an essential way. Although the rationality provided by science tells us how the world works, it is the spiritual stories that help us understand the much bigger picture of we call life.

Julian's People - BBC radio Solent March

Had another couple minute interview today. I finally managed to spend some time talking about science, philosophy and ethics today!

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~rmhasek/radio/JP6_Mar11.mp3

Bioethics talk

Did a talk at a church in Brighton a couple weeks back on Bioethics. They kindly recorded the talk and put it on their website:

http://www.calvary-brighton.org.uk/2011/a-christian-perspective-on-bioethics/

This was the first time I had given this talk so it wasn't quite as polished as I may of liked and had a good deal of umming an erring, however it did seem to go down quite well and was followed with a very good question and answer session.

I find this subject really interesting as it is misunderstood by Christians who make assumptions without properly thinking things through, and by agnostics/atheists who assume that all Christians follow an ethics guided by Rome and hence oppose abortion, contraception etc. Indeed the local atheists turned up and told me that they agreed with pretty much all of what I said apart from my statement that the Christian narrative was the best framework through which to see life (and on which to base a virtue ethic). This pleased me because I respect atheists for their rigorous logic and refusal to accept jumps in reasoning.

Commenting on science in the news

I had another one of my regular interviews on local BBC radio this morning and the DJ decided it was far more interesting to ask me about health stories in the news. As I had yet to even see a paper I couldn't comment on any specifically, however we did have a chat about how scientific breakthroughs are reported in the press. I've been sort of wanting to do more radio stuff and dropping hints with the guys at the station, so hopefully this mornings interview may be one step towards being on more regularly.

Click here for this mornings interview.

Daily Thoughts - BBC Solent

Brrr - it's been a freezing week with lots of snow so I only made it into the studio once - good thing we do pre-records for the earlier broadcast. This time round I was inspired by an ethics course I am doing with each thought based upon a different theory of ethics (although I've simplified somewhat for the radio).

The recordings:

Tuesday 30th November
Wednesday 1st December
Thursday 2nd December
Friday 3rd December

The text versions:

Day 1 – Consequences

The other day I got on the train at Southampton Airport on my way to London and found myself sitting next to a rather nice pair of woolly gloves that a previous passenger had obviously left on the train. I tried them on and they fitted beautifully, and even had a cosy fleece lining on the inside.

If I had been intending to get off the train at Winchester I would have probably thought “what a stroke of luck”, put them in my pocket and enjoyed having warm hands. However, since I was staying on the train quite a lot longer than the ten minutes it take to get to Winchester, I got to thinking why I automatically found it acceptable to just keep a pair of gloves that obviously were not mine.

Perhaps one of the most common ways we make decisions about what is right and what is wrong, is by thinking through the consequences of our actions. In this case the previous owner was unlikely to come looking for their gloves, I wouldn’t exactly get arrested for taking them off the train, no one else would know where I had got them, they were probably only worth £20, and my current pair of gloves had a hole in them and I hadn’t found the time to buy a new pair yet.

But, although all these considerations were quite valid, did they form a good basis for a decision? Are the consequences of our actions all that matter or are there other principles we should be paying attention to? Is it OK to do something merely because I think I can get away with it, or should my sense of right and wrong rest on something deeper?


Day 2 – Principles

In my day job I work as a scientist involved in medical research. Although I don’t get paid quite as much as I might like, an important part of this job for me, is the feeling that I am doing something worthwhile that will probably help other people in the long term.

A particularly critical part of any medical research project is the first time a new medicine is given to humans. This sort of experiment normally happens between five and ten years into a project, and although we have a great deal of information about the new medicine at this point - it’s only when it is finally tested on a person that we get to find out if it causes more good than harm.

As you can probably imagine such experiments are performed very carefully and with close attention paid not only to the medical science aspect, but also to the ethics. Indeed we have to ask ourselves four key ethical questions before proceeding: firstly, are we trying to do good, secondly are we causing any harm, thirdly are we respecting the autonomy (that’s the free choice) of our willing participants, and fourthly are we acting fairly and respecting equality?

Prior to doing medical research I hadn’t really heard about these four principles, but the more I have had to consider them professionally the more I have found them applicable to other areas of my life as well. Time and again, when facing a decision about how to act I find myself asking these four questions - am I trying to do good, am I trying to avoid harm, am I respecting other people and am I acting fairly?

Day 3 – Virtues

What do you think when you hear the words “virtue and vices”? Perhaps some ancient churchy type thing, maybe a Victorian understanding of right and wrong, put surely not something that is applicable to the South Coast of England in the 21st century – are they?

I do think that it is a bit of a shame that words like virtue and vice have drifted out of our everyday vocabulary as they both concern issues that all of us talk (and often gossip) with our friends about almost all the time. “That was so dishonest” we might say or “she’s such a loving mother”, or “he’s so forgiving” or “she’s a hard worker”. You see virtues are simply positive character traits, such as patience, kindness, humility, charity, diligence, hard working or loving. Similarly vices include pride, greed, lust, anger, gluttony, envy or laziness.

The ancient Greek philosopher, Aristotle, was one of the first to come up with this idea of virtues and vices. He was concerned with the question “how is the best way to live?” Instead of focusing on what a person did, he thought it was important to focus on who a person was. His argument was that even in the most difficult or complicated situations, a virtuous person would always do the “right thing” simply because they practiced the virtues on an everyday basis. In other words virtues cannot be switched on or off depending on the situation – they are a constant part of our character and we need to practice them in order to have them!

Day 4 – an ethic of care

Just about two years ago I became a father. Although I obviously knew lots of people with children who tried to warn me what I was getting myself into, I don’t think any amount of psychological preparation could quite prepare me for what was in store once we got our little bundle of joy home from the hospital! I certainly now know what people mean when they say a child gives you the highest highs, but also the lowest lows.

One of my friends, a biologist without children, tells me on the mornings when I struggle into work bleary eyed with calpol and dribble stains on my shirt, that I have evolved to be manipulated by my son in order to pass genes on into the future. He tells me I do not have a choice in the matter, this is just the way biology works. But, although I love biology, and think that biological explanations can be very powerful, I think it’s slightly wide of the mark to say parenting is just about being manipulated by your offspring: there is something incredibly powerful about caring for a child, meeting their needs and seeing them grow, that changes you as a person.

Our western culture seems to encourage people to be individuals, compete with others and use experience and education for self-development, however there are some things that can only be learned when we stop our own lives and start caring for those around us. OK a baby or toddler might be harder to ignore than an older person, friend or work colleague, however caring for others isn’t only about our own personal sacrifice – it changes who we are and how we think, often in a very positive way.

Science, Faith, Evolution and Christianity

A forty minute talk I gave at the Institute for Contemporary Christianity last Saturday for the Christians in Science student conference. A bit of a breathless review of the whole subject area including some thoughts on evolution.

The Talk:

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~rmhasek/misc/Science_Faith_Evolution.mp3

The slides are at the following link although the file is quite big so might need a right click and download as (25Mb):

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~rmhasek/misc/StudentConference2010.pdf

A more upbeat Julian's people!

The latest two minute interview on BBC Radio Solent:

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~rmhasek/radio/JP4_Nov10.mp3

Friday 13th daily thoughts from BBC Radio solent

It's quite fun being in the studio four mornings in a row reading the daily thoughts out live. Julian Clegg is an impressive DJ to watch in action - seeming to be able to talk whilst reading the next item and sounding laid back despite the often chaotic scenes in the studio around him. I get about ten seconds to talk to him during the jingles and then thats it - I'm in and out!

Todays thought can be heard here.

Day 4: 

Good morning. 

In my final thought this week, inspired by the book “life of Pi”, I want to dwell on a comment made by the heroes dad when they are busy selling all the animals in their zoo, ready to emigrate from India to Canada. Being a good zoo-keeper the father is keen that all the animals go to a good home, and ruefully muses that the greater good and the greater profit are not always compatible aims. 

I was really struck by this comment especially in a time of financial austerity when everything we hear in the news is about cutting services, stopping building projects, reducing pensions and people losing jobs. Yes of course we need companies and an economy that is sustainable, however sometimes we should ask whether it is actually pursuing the “greater good” to put balance sheets before the needs of people, especially in organisations such as government whose whole purpose is to serve and look after society. Is it actually pursuing the greater good to have an economy that is bigger and better than everyone elses, or should we sometimes temper our ambitions by remembering that the greater profit and the greater good are not the same thing? 

Similarly on a personal level, once we have achieved a standard of living that meets our basic needs, should we now stop and consider how our extra time and resources are spent? Do we just look for “more, better, now” or do we try to enjoy life and perhaps even make a difference? If the greater good and the greater profit are not always compatible, which of the two are we pursuing?

Daily thoughts day 3 (August)

Listen here or read:

Day 3: 

Good morning. 

In the book “life of Pi” the main character is stranded on a life-boat for many months. He comes to realise what his needs in life really are, and what aspects of his previous life were in fact luxuries. It is quite amazing to read an account like this and think quite how few things we really need, and indeed how many of our “essential” possessions are in fact luxuries. 

Let me give an example - recently a new electronics store opened around the corner from where I live so I went for a visit to check it out. This turned into a bit of a mistake as it was a “sale” weekend and everyone seemed to be fighting to get to the TV section and bag the “bargain” offers. I couldn’t help but be drawn to the offers section and start laying extravagant plans for a home cinema – an apparent “need” in my life that I hadn’t previously recognised. I went home and spent all night dreaming about the cinema system, and worrying how I could afford it, or indeed fit it into my sitting room. However, after spending a night tossing and turning all my great plans were quickly squashed by my wife who reminded me that a home cinema was not a basic need, and indeed not even an option! 

So here’s my thought for the day – once we have enough resources to meet the really basic needs, do we realise that any extra money or time can be used to make us happy, or do we automatically begin to look around, decide on greater “needs”, and then get stressed about trying to afford them? Do we use our extra resources to bring happiness, or simply more stress?