Andrew Briggs started to write the book Human Flourishing just before COVID and then the world went mad. Since then, the world has gotten even madder and many people are clutching their smartphones, wringing their hands, managing their anxiety, or merely existing. What does it mean to flourish and what do people, relationships, and professions look like and feel like when they flourish?
In this book, authors Andrew Briggs and Michael J. Reiss and painter Roger Wagner weave together a beautiful picture of the material and immaterial, the concrete and the spiritual. Included here is a reproduction of Roger Wagner’s painting It Keeps Me Seeking.
The original painting hangs in The Auckland Project Faith Museum: https://aucklandproject.org/attraction/faith-museum/
Where Did Life And The Genetic Code Come From? Can The Answer Build Superior AI? The #1 Mystery In Science Now Has A $10 Million Prize. Learn More About It, Here – https://www.herox.com/evolution2.0
I find it fascinating that I recently arrived at Andrew’s “tennis court” metaphor (around 21:00) independently. He describes it as science on one side of the net and knowing God on the other, with each side trying to get the other to miss and thereby win the point. As a pastor, I used the metaphor in a sermon to describe life conflicts in general, not just science and faith.
I think this applies to your observation, Perry, about 80/20 as applied to controversy. Your power curve suggests that there will be immense support and opposition for two sides of an emotionally charged argument. It is the same way here. I wonder, then, whether it is possible to avoid the tennis match. It seems that the tennis match will always continue, even if the subjects that are part of the match will change.
Either way, I think true spiritual introspection and awareness involves seeing that the tennis match is happening, and becoming curious about what can be learned, rather than taking up one’s side.
It is further interesting that I have heard the same metaphor used by Stephen Meyer in a wonderful dialogue he had with Jim Stump in a Language of God podcast (https://biologos.org/podcast-episodes/stephen-c-meyer-is-god-a-hypothesis). Meyer mentioned near the end of the episode how it was good for Biologos and ID to “meet in the middle” and shake hands. I think there is a great takeaway from this. It is more about recognizing and learning from the dialogue than attaching one’s ego to a side.
I am very happy to observe that the evolution wars have cooled A LOT in the last 5-10 years and many conversations that were impossible a long time ago are now possible. We’ve recorded a conversation between me, Denis Noble and Casey Luskin of the Discovery Institute that will be out in coming weeks, with a similar more light / less heat vibe.
I agree with Richard Rohr’s observation that a lot of these debates are driven by ego which has a funny way of keeping us from listening to each other.
Thanks for your response. I look forward to hearing that conversation.
Love the sailing metaphor. Thanks for the conversation.
Thanks for listening in.