Practical Applications of Faith and Science
The American Scientific Affiliation’s Southern California Christians in Science Chapter
2016 Winter Day Conference
9 AM – 5 PM on Saturday, February 27, 2016 Fuller Seminary, Pasadena, CA
3
Conference Schedule 8:30 - 9:00 AM Registration & fellowship over light refreshments in the lobby of
Travis Auditorium in the Psychology building (P on the map)
9:00 – 9:10 AM Welcome and Opening Remarks, Stephen Contakes & Reed Metcalf Travis Auditorium in the Psychology building (P on the map)
9:10 – 10:10 AM Morning Plenary: Forming Identities of Grace: Cognitive and Neural
Models of a Self-for-Others in Communities of Dedicated Forgiveness and Reconciliation Michael Spezio, Travis Auditorium
10:10 – 10:30 AM Refreshment break on the Psychology Building Patio 10:30 AM – Noon Morning parallel sessions - see the schedule on the following pages
for room locations and presentation titles Noon – 1 PM Lunch on the Psychology Building Patio & posters in the lobby of Travis
Auditorium (Payton 101 in the event of rain)
1:00 – 2:00 PM Afternoon Plenary: Human Nature in an Evolving Cosmos Mark Graves, Fuller Theological Seminary in Travis Auditorium
2:00 – 2:10 PM Refreshment break on the Psychology Building Patio 2:10 – 3:10 PM Afternoon parallel sessions - see the schedule on the following
pages for room locations and presentation titles
3:10 – 3:20 PM Refreshment break on the Psychology Building Patio 3:20 – 4:20 PM Lecture and Networking Event: Faith and Science, Science of Faith, Justin
Barrett, Fuller Theological Seminary in Travis Auditorium
4:20 – 5:00 PM Reception on the Psychology Building Patio
4
Morning Parallel Session Schedule
IAM- The Behavioral Sciences and Christian Faith I: Ancient Faith
Informed by Cutting Edge Science
Michael Everest, chair
Travis Auditorium
IIAM – Unique Courses for Unique Impact
Jim Buchholz, chair
DMin Ray Anderson Classroom in the 490
Building (W on the map)
IIIAM – Science, Theology, and Church
Stephen Contakes, chair
Psychology Building,
room 311
10:30 –
11:00 AM
The Cognitive Science of Religion and Christian
Practice: Prayer, Worship, and the Science of Faith
Laird R. O. Edman
Northwestern College
Faith Integration in Instructional Practice: The
Unique Responsibility, Obligation, & Privilege of
Religiously-Affiliated Colleges & Universities
William Loose1 & Teri Marcos2
1. Azusa Pacific University 2. National University
Molecular Symmetry, Beauty, & Truth
Amanda Nichols1 and Myron
Penner2
1. Oklahoma Christian University 2. Trinity Western University
11:00 –
11:30 AM
Are We Predisposed to Believe in Afterlife? Re-examining Evolutionary Psychology of Religion
Chong Ho Yu,1 Juanita Cole,2 William Whitney,1 Grace Kim3
1. Azusa Pacific University 2. Trinity Washington University; 3. Rosemead School of Psychology
Instruction of Contemporary Global Issues such as Climate
Change in Lower-Division Undergraduate Courses at
a Christian University
Louise Huang, Azusa Pacific University
Do the Laws of Physics Lie? The Representational
(Metaphysical) Limitations of Science & its Implications
for Theological Reflection
Finney Premkumar, Azusa Pacific University
11:30 AM
- noon
Neuroimaging, Spirituality, and the Death of the
“Overlapping Activity” Inference
Teresa K. Pegors,
Azusa Pacific University
Virtues in Anatomy and Medicine
Kathleen Tallman, Azusa Pacific University
Might it be Helpful to think of Science-Faith Dialogue as Reading & Appropriating
the Text of God’s Two Books in a Particular Social
Context? Some Thoughts on Aristotelian Matter Theory in
the 13th Century
Stephen Contakes Westmont College
5
Afternoon Parallel Session Schedule
IPM- The Behavioral Sciences and
Christian Faith II: Illuminating
Science-Faith Dialogue
Travis Auditorium
IIPM – Science, Faith, & Christian
Service
Tom Ferko, Chair
DMin Ray Anderson Classroom in the 490
Building (W on the map)
IIIPM – Evaluating Proposals about Science & Faith
Stephen Contakes,
Chair
Psychology Building, room 311
IVPM – Christianity Engaging a
Scientific and Technological
Culture
Matt Lumpkin, moderator
Psychology Building, room 314
2:10 –
2:40 PM
Student
Characteristics and the Science-
Religion Dialogue
Erin I. Smith
California Baptist University
Engaging Science
Majors in a Service-Based Discipleship
Program
Thomas E. Ferko and Patrick C. Schact
California Baptist University
“Nuclear Chemistry & Medicine: Why Young-Earthers
can’t have it both Ways”
Myron Penner1 and Amanda Nichols2
1. Trinity Western University;
2. Oklahoma Christian University
What Technology Wants: Christian
Technologists and Academics
Respond to Kevin Kelley
Matt Lumpkin, Ryan Bolger,
Matthew Eppinete, and Gerry Picket Fuller Seminary
2:40 –
3:10 PM
African American Pastors’ Candid
Discussions Regarding
Addressing Trauma and Violence in
Urban Communities of Need
Jennifer Shepard Payne Azusa Pacific University
Presenting the
Gospel in the Lingo of a Scientist
Audrey Chen,
California Institute of Technology
Practical Faith:
Facts - Hypothesis - Testing – Evidence
Steve Huffey
6
Poster Session in the Travis Auditorium Lobby of the Psychology Building
Oceanic Plastics, Microorganisms, and the Virtue of Moderation: A Semester-long Student Project Sarah M. Richart, Azusa Pacific University Faith and Science at Fuller Theological Seminary Deb Shepherd,* Reed Metcalf, and Joel Green, Fuller Theological Seminary The Science and Religion Club at Point Loma Nazarene University. Taylor Steele, Lindsay Semmler, Zachary Beavis, and April Cordero Maskiewicz, Point Loma Nazarene University Westmont College’s Science and Faith Club Kirk Fetters*, Matt Mahler, Rachael Maragliano, Hien Bui, and Stephen Contakes Westmont College Analysis of California Baptist University’s Science and Religion Club Guadalupe Buitron, Jake Love, and Erin I. Smith, California Baptist University
FoO
Poputhe tno dthe sscienphencomNewgraccomCollaalonatom
Mic
Michappoand pracnoveReligNeuryearfinishCharPasacomFounin syUnivmini
orming IdOthers in
ular talk andthick reality istinction beself as primance of tnomena. Intmitment to
w understande informingpassion andaborative wog with new mistic self‐de
chael Spe
hael Spezio tointment at social neurtice. In addel ways to engion and Sciroscience; ar‐long residehing work oracter in Lovadena, CA, hpassion, anndation, theystems and versity. He hster of Word
dentitien Comm
d scholarly rof the phenetween benearily egoisticthe moralerdisciplinarlove, comp
dings arisingg morally ded justice, aork with themodels of s
etermination
ezio
teaches psythe Institut
roscientist sition to his ngage sciencience; Theoand the fortential fellowon a project ving Encounhe is workinnd care for Fetzer Insticognitive nehas a Masted and Sacram
Mo
s of Gramunities
Micha
reflection onnomena of reficent and c, individuali life witry ethnograppassion, and from this pedicated coand daily coese communself‐formation, toward be
chology andte for Systempecializing scientific rece, theologylogy and thhcoming Ha
wship at the entitled Minnter. Togethng on a proothers. Histute, and theuroscience er of Divinityment in the
orning PTravis
ce: Cognof Dedic
ael Spez
n how to liveeal interest.benevolent istic, and atothin a dphic close lis care, formshenomenal mmunities. ontemplativnities suggeson that expaecoming a se
d neuroscienms Neurosciin the cognesearch andy, and spirituhe Science oabits in Mininterdisciplndful‐Emotioher with coloject invests work is fhe John Temfrom the Uy degree froPresbyterian
Plenary Ss Auditor
nitive ancated Fo
zio, Scrip
e a moral lif. For exampaction and nomistic. Thisdeeply intstening to ans a phenomturn includeGrace grou
ve practicessts new wayand our visielf for others
nce at Scrippience at thenitive scienc peer‐reviewual perspectof Moral Acd: Ethics, Reinary Centeonal Personslleagues at igating the funded by gmpleton Founniversity of om Pittsburn Church (U.
Sessionium
nd Neuraorgivene
pps Colle
fe often exhle, the concno acknowles talk will suterdisciplinand with commenal turn we a new awaunds the acs (e.g., prayys of understion of the ses.
ps College ine UKE in Hamce of emotiowed publicaives. He co‐etion: Virtueeligion, andr of Theologs: From CogCaltech andcognitive sgenerous sundation. MicOregon, anrgh Theolog.S.A.).
n
al Modeess and R
ege
hibit thin acccept of "altruedgment thauggest new wry engage
mmunities of within the scareness of thcts and inteyer, ritual) tanding gracelf beyond
n Claremontmburg, Germon, moral aations in scieedited the Re Ethics, Exe the Sciencegical Inquirygnitive Sciend at Fuller Science of stupport fromchael has twnd one in bioical Semina
els of a SReconcil
counts that uism" is ofteat altruism tways of appement of longstandincience of thhe central imntions of ein these cce, characteutility maxim
t, CA. He homany. He is action, and ence, his woRoutledge Coemplarity, ane of Virtue.y in Princetonce and VirtuSchool of Ptable characm the Natiowo doctoral dochemistry fry and is or
7
Self‐for‐liation
rarely get toen used withheories viewroaching thereal‐world
ng, dedicatede moral lifemportance oempathy andcommunitieser, and hopemization and
olds a visitingan affectivemindfulnesork presentompanion tond Cognitive Thanks to aon, NJ, he iue Theory tosychology incter in loveonal Sciencedegrees, onefrom Cornerdained as a
7
o h w e d d e. f d s. e, d
g e s s o e a s o n e, e e ll a
HowscienHumRoycself‐devebehainves
MaMarkPsycSchodoctpostworkbefoof ThSantcom(Ash
w does humantists read aman spiritualce understooemptying (elopmentallyavior and mstigate cons
rk Gravek Graves whology's Traool of Theolotorate in comdoctoral felk on the Humore studying heology at Bta Clara Unputer sciencgate 2008) a
Hum
Ma
nity fit withand model. Sity, in particod as interpkenotic) spy disabled, moral actiontructs of mo
s orks at Fullavis Researcogy and Visitmputer scienlowship in gman Genomsystematic
Berkeley. He iversity, andce, biology, and Insight t
Afte
man Na
ark Grav
in an evolvinScientificallycular, can empretive commirituality anto study em. The studyoral and spir
er Theologich Institute ating Associance at Univegenomics atme Project. Hand philosotaught in thd Fuller Sempsychology,to Heal: Co‐C
ernoon PTravis
ature in
ves, Fulle
ng cosmos? y, one can mmerge in communities witnd caring vmpirically hoy of moral aitual signific
ical Seminarand is Adjunte in Psychoersity of Mic Baylor CollHe worked inphical theolhe area of scminary, and, and theoloCreating Bea
Plenary s Auditor
an Evo
er Theol
Theologicallmodel humammunities tth a commitvirtues of Low their "daction withiance.
ry as Reseanct Associatology at Califchigan in thege of Medn biotechnoogy at Gradcience and red he has pogy, includinauty Amidst
Sessionium
olving C
ogical Se
ly, one can ran body, minthat the Chrtment to LoyL'Arche comownwardly in commun
arch Assistane Professor fornia Instite area of ardicine as onelogy and phuate Theoloeligion at GTublished 40ng the bookHuman Suff
n
Cosmo
eminary
reclaim Creand, and spirristian philosyalty‐to‐Loymmunities omobile" relity suggests
nt Professorof Theologyute of Technrtificial intele of the firsharmaceuticaogical Union TU, Universit0 technical ks Mind, Brafering (Casca
os
y
ation as a Borit as emergsopher of reyalty. We invof caregivelationality ims a way to
r in the Dey and Sciencnology. Afteligence, he t computer al research f(GTU) and Jty of Californand scholarain, and the ade Books 20
8
ook of Natureent systemseligion Josiahvestigate thers, and thempacts theiscientifically
partment oce in Fuller'er earning hicompleted ascientists tofor ten yearJesuit Schoonia Berkeleyrly works inElusive Sou013).
8
e s. h e e r y
f s s a o s ol y, n ul
9
Talk and Reception on the Future of Faith and Science Travis Auditorium
Faith and Science, Science of Faith
Justin Barrett, Fuller Theological Seminary
Cognitive science of religion draws upon cognitive and evolutionary sciences to explore why it is that belief in gods, for instance, is so common across cultures. Does the theological accommodation of science face different challenges when the science is aimed to understand faith itself? In this session I aim to accomplish three things: (1) introduce the cognitive and evolutionary sciences of religion and discuss their implications for Christian belief, (2) use this discussion as an illustration of the broad landscape concerning faith‐science engagement at Fuller Theological Seminary, and (3) invite ASA to advise Fuller’s Office for Science, Theology, and Religion Initiatives (STAR Office) concerning how Fuller might be a resource to scientists interested in how Christian theology and lived faith can engage their professional scientific thought and practice.
Justin Barrett
Justin L. Barrett joined the School of Psychology in 2011 as Thrive Professor of Developmental Science and served as director of the Thrive Center for Human Development from 2011 to 2014. An experimental psychologist, Barrett taught for five years in Oxford University’s School of Anthropology, and is best known for his research on religion.
While at Oxford, Professor Barrett helped establish and became the director of the Centre for Anthropology and Mind, and the Institute for Cognitive and Evolutionary Anthropology. Early in his academic career, Professor Barrett served as an assistant professor of psychology at Calvin College and was a research investigator and visiting professor at the Institute of Social Research and the Culture and Cognition Program at the University of Michigan.
Professor Barrett is regarded as one of the founders of the cognitive science of religion field; a recent project in this area extended cognitive science of religion to China, for which he was awarded a grant from the Templeton World Charity Foundation (2011–2015). Barrett’s main focus at Fuller is to develop faith and science initiatives.
Barrett has authored more than 70 chapters and articles concerning cognitive, developmental, and evolutionary approaches to the study of religion. His interdisciplinary interests are evident in that he has scholarly journal publications in anthropology, philosophy, religious studies, psychology, and even literary studies in interdisciplinary journals. His authored books are Why Would Anyone Believe in God? (2004), Cognitive Science, Religion, and Theology: From Human Minds to Divine Minds (2011), and Born Believers: The Science of Children's Religious Belief (2012). He has also edited a four‐volume collection Psychology of Religion (2010).
10
Oral and Poster Presentation Abstracts
IAM- The Behavioral Sciences and Christian Faith I in Travis Auditorium 10:30 – 11:00 AM 11:00 – 11:30 AM 11:30 AM ‐ Noon
The Cognitive Science of Religion and Christian
Practice: Prayer, Worship, and the Science of Faith
Laird R. O. Edman
Northwestern College
The cognitive science of religion (CSR) uses a multi‐disciplinary approach to examine the underlying and invisible cognitive structures upon which religious behavior and belief rest. Human cognitive architecture leads us to find some ideas memorable and others not, to expect and see agents at work in many of the events of life, to see purpose and design everywhere, and to have intuitions about the meaning of rituals based upon the structure of the social action. These processes may help to explain some of the reasons humans find religious ritual so important, the tendencies we have to believe some theological concepts and struggle with others, and which ideas about God children appear to be primed to quickly understand and believe. Knowing about these default cognitive intuitions should be useful in many areas of Christian spiritual formation.
This presentation will first review the nature of and evidence for CSR. Then the focus will shift to examining in particular the ways CSR might be helpful for Christian spiritual formation‐‐in understanding the cognitive intuitions involved in worship and prayer. Lawson and McCauley's (2002) Ritual Form Hypothesis uses the normal cognitive intuitions involved in social interaction to explain many human intuitions about worship. This theory may help explain some of the push for, and reaction against, contemporary and traditional approaches to worship.
CSR also raises numerous issues regarding prayer, especially as prayer involves a person's theory of mind, the use of the imagination, and sense of the presence of God. This has implications concerning the best ways to teach prayer.
Are We Predisposed to Believe in Afterlife? Re-examining
Evolutionary Psychology of Religion
Chong Ho Yu,1 Juanita Cole,2 William Whitney,1 Grace Kim3
1. Azusa Pacific University; 2. Trinity Washington University; 3. Rosemead School of Psychology
Cognitive psychologist Jesse Bering attempted to “naturalize” religious belief by appealing to the theory of evolution. In his view, the evolutionary process pre‐disposed the human mind to assume a spiritual realm in which the dead people continue to keep their consciousness. This belief of after‐life becomes the foundation of our moral order and religion. Bering and his colleagues conducted a series of studies to support this claim, such as the experiment of puppet play, the experiment of ghost story, the content analysis of obituaries, and the experiment of trait attributions by photos. This presentation focuses on the last two studies only. Bering’s content analysis of obituaries indicates that people tend to say nice things about the character of the deceased rather than their achievements. Bering attributed this phenomenon to our natural tendency of recognizing the realm of the dead. However, when this study was replicated with two UK samples, it was found that the British people, who are less religious than the Americans, tended to emphasize the achievement of the deceased, implying that this so‐called natural phenomenon is indeed cultural. Further, in Bering’s study of trait attributions, participants were asked to rate the characters of the persons on the given photos in two sittings. In the second round of rating when the experimenter told the participants that one of the persons in the photos passed away, the average ratings for that person significantly went up. Again, Bering asserted that the raters implicitly assumed that the dead man knew the score and thus they did not dare to give a low rating. However, this experiment did not take the religious belief of the participants into account. Our data show that initially the non‐religious group gave higher ratings to the dead person than the religious group in the pretest, but the order switched in the posttest. Specifically, religious participants gave much higher ratings to the dead agent in the posttest than what they gave in the pretest. On the other hand, the non‐religious group dropped their ratings slightly. This result suggests that recognition and fear of supernatural is not universal.
Neuroimaging, Spirituality, and the Death of the “Overlapping
Activity” Inference
Teresa K. Pegors, Azusa Pacific University
Eye‐catching research splashed across news websites has familiarized lay‐readers with neuroscientific studies showing that certain regions of the brain “light up” in response to events, thoughts, and emotions. Often, claims are made that if two of these experiences, feelings, etc. activate the same region of the brain, they are functionally equivalent, or at the very least, use a shared neural process. The validity of these claims are of great interest to people in fields ranging from addiction to marketing and such research also has implications for research into the neuroscience of religion. For example, does overlapping brain activity for Christian and Buddhist meditation ultimately mean these practices are equivalent? In my talk, I will introduce both a scientific and theological critique of the “overlapping activity” inference with the goal of providing insight into how a thoughtful Christian might understand neuroimaging research in the religious domain. I will first provide a simple explanation of common neuroimaging analyses that measure overall levels of activity in a brain region and describe typical inferences that researchers and readers alike make based upon the data. I will next contrast this type of analysis with a now widely used class of neuroimaging analyses that measure patterns of activity rather than overall levels of activity in a region. I will give examples of various uses of this type of analysis from my own work and explain why overlapping activity in the brain is no longer considered a strong argument for sameness of function. I will then focus specifically on what this means for neuroimaging studies of religious practices. Finally, I will present a hypothetical case of true sameness in brain function between two religious practices and one possible theological response.
11
IIAM – Unique Courses for Unique Impact, Jim Buchholz, Chair
DMin Ray Anderson Classroom in the 490 Building 10:30 – 11:00 AM 11:00 – 11:30 AM 11:30 AM ‐ Noon
Faith Integration in Instructional Practice: The
Unique Responsibility, Obligation, & Privilege of
Religiously-Affiliated Colleges & Universities
William Loose1 & Teri Marcos2
1. Azusa Pacific University; 2. National University
This presentation will be an interactive dialog with Christian professors regarding faith integration into the content delivery of courses offered in religious‐affiliated institutes of higher education (IHE). Religiously‐affiliated IHE’s often require that all professors integrate Christian faith as part of the course content across all disciplines offered in the university. The unique focus of this presentation will include a faith‐integration approach through the interplay of perspectives posed by Hasker and Wesley via a model created by Dr. Marcos. This model is adaptable and applicable to any curricular discipline offered at the university level. The principles and constructs of Biblically‐rooted truths within a Christian worldview, such as managing change effectively (Numbers 13:30‐31; 2 Samuel 5:8‐9), working well with people of all cultures (Isaiah 10: 1‐2), and handling stress well (Philippians 1:12‐14; Judges 3:7‐9; Psalm 23:1), will also be shared in the presentation.
Instruction of Contemporary Global Issues such as Climate
Change in Lower-Division Undergraduate Courses at a
Christian University
Louise Huang, Azusa Pacific University
Fragmented and contradictory information from mass media and other similar sources result in knowledge gaps as well as misconceptions about climate change among Americans. Recent articles indicate that education is the single predictor of public climate change awareness.
1,2 Contemporary issues such as climate change are science in nature yet global in scope. These topics can be included in lower division university courses. By introducing these complex and controversial issues early on in their undergraduate studies, students may gain more awareness of these topics. Furthermore, while climate change awareness is often considered as an ecological or a political ideology, it is closely connected to environmental stewardship and sustainability. The underlying principle of environmental stewardship and sustainability actually stems from Christianity. Hence, the instruction of courses on these topics at a Christian university can offer an even more complete view of climate change and other global issues. This presentation will discuss the incorporation of these topics in courses such as Introduction to Chemistry and First‐Year Seminar on Global Citizenship at Azusa Pacific University. The effectiveness of raising awareness and increasing the understanding of some of these global issues that lead to appropriate action will be explored. 1 Lee T.M. et al. (2015) Predictors of Public Climate Change Awareness and Risk Perception Around the World. Nature Climate Change. 5: 1014‐1023. 2 Leiserowitz, A., Smith, N. & Marlon, J.R. (2010) Americans’ Knowledge of Climate Change. Yale University. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change Communication.
Virtues in Anatomy and Medicine
Kathleen Tallman,
Azusa Pacific University
In twenty‐five years of teaching anatomy, I have watched students respond to the emotional experience of working with a cadaver and mature through this experience. Students express compassion, gratitude, and humility, among other virtues, as they engage in a cadaver experience. Yet recognizing this benefit, or providing an opportunity for students to reflect on a cadaver experience, is not common in anatomy courses. The focus on learning details of structures and their relationships may overshadow the potential for students to develop virtues such as compassion and gratitude. The purpose of this presentation is to identify virtues of medical practice that can be experienced in the anatomy lab. The history of anatomy and medicine are intricately intertwined with each other. Diseases could be neither understood nor treated until anatomical structures were identified. Anatomy focused on the acquisition of knowledge that was then applied to the understanding of disease. Medicine developed virtues of empathy, prudence, and temperance in patient care in addition to documenting disease progression and potential treatment. Therefore, anatomy and clinical medicine share some virtues including careful and conscientious observation followed by thoughtful interpretation of results. Concerns about the privacy and confidentiality of cadaver use are similar to the medical virtues of prudence and temperance in patient care. There is also an opportunity to develop compassion, humility, and gratitude in anatomy, although the way in which it is practiced in the anatomy lab will be different than in medical practice. This presentation will begin with a historical perspective on the development of virtue in medical practice and anatomy, move to a modern perspective of medicine focusing on the principles of medical practice (autonomy, beneficence, and justice), and conclude with a comparison and analysis of the Christian virtues (faith, hope, and love) with virtues of medical practice. When incorporated into anatomy education, virtue can enhance learning and forge links with future patient care. Incorporating Christian virtues into anatomical education can deepen students’ faith and their ability to integrate their Christian character into medical practice.
12
IIIAM – Science, Theology, and the Church Psychology Building, room 311
10:30 – 11:00 AM 11:00 – 11:30 AM 11:30 AM ‐ Noon
Molecular Symmetry, Beauty, & Truth
Amanda Nichols1 and
Myron Penner2
1. Oklahoma Christian University 2. Trinity Western University;
There are two broad ways in which the language of aesthetics creeps into scientific discourse. One way is at the level of theory, where a theory is said to display aesthetic properties like elegance or simplicity. Hence, scientists may prefer one theory over another based upon its aesthetic quality. Another way aesthetic language sometimes appears in science is at the level of observation, where certain particular observations are identified as beautiful or aesthetically pleasing. With respect to this latter way, crystallography in general, and molecular symmetry in particular, provides several examples of observations that seem to have an aesthetic quality to them. In our paper, we argue that the case of molecular symmetry supports a strong connection between beauty and truth, beauty of the sort described by Heisenberg as “the proper conformity of the parts to one another, and to the whole.” More specifically, we argue that (1) observations of molecular symmetry have aesthetic qualities, (2) that these aesthetic qualities have strong explanatory value, and therefore that (3) molecular symmetry provides examples of a strong link between beauty and truth.
Do the Laws of Physics Lie? The Representational (Metaphysical)
Limitations of Science & its Implications for Theological
Reflection
Finney Premkumar, Azusa Pacific University
What does science and especially the laws of physics tell us about the cosmos we inhabit? From Lavoisier’s quantitative chemistry experiments that showed the conservation of matter and Faraday’s introduction of the notion of forces down to Einstein’s theories of special and general relativity, science seems to provide a special sort of privileged access to reality. However, can this access or representational and metaphysical reach which has been historically assumed be sustained? For instance, although the wave function in Quantum Mechanics seems to refer to things and processes does it actually only serve to arrange phenomena in a systematic way sustained by a particular semantic framework? In other words, can the ‘empirical claims’ of science lead to ‘existence claims’ or Truth such that science can be shown to have the requisite representational power that has customarily been attributed to it? If not, what are the implications for theological reflection?
This paper will, first and foremost, briefly discuss the nature of science (especially physics) and its rigorous methodology in an effort to show that it is not necessarily truth‐conferring i.e., get us to what Richard Rorty called a ‘final vocabulary’ or reality. While satisfaction of a given theory by the rules of method might warrant acceptance of the theory, it is not thereby truth conferring since its reliability or confirmation does not exemplify nor explain why it conduces to truth in a non‐epistemic sense thereby displacing the perceived ideality of science in interdisciplinary discussions. Accordingly, it will follow that what Charles Taylor called the “Western Master Narrative” whereby science is given a foundational status in discussions with other disciplines, especially theology, cannot be sustained. Secondly, in light of the built‐in limitations of science and its methodology, I will maintain that the acceptability of specific theological (or philosophical) positions can be facilitated by, but need not be derived from or validated by scientific models. I will conclude with specific implications for theological reflection in light of the modified vision of its interaction with science.
Might it be helpful to think of Science-Faith Dialogue as Reading & Appropriating the Text of God’s Two Books in a Particular Social
Context? Thoughts on Aristotelian Matter Theory in the 13th Century
Stephen Contakes Westmont College
Much thinking about the relationship between religion and science involves assumptions about science, religion, and their relationship that have been rendered problematic by contemporary historical scholarship. There is no essential historical relationship of conflict, harmony, or separation between religion and science; instead how the two are understood and related depends heavily on historical and local factors. This paper seeks to explore the implications of local context effects for contemporary science‐faith dialogue by exploring two questions. First, whether anything might be gained by reframing the dialogue model for relating science and religion in terms of the reading and appropriation of God’s two books by intentional agents acting in a particular social context. Second, whether particular religious groups’ and individuals’ responses to science might be useful indicators of spiritual health that can be fruitfully employed in spiritual care. These questions will first be explored in terms of 13
th Century religious attitudes towards Aristotelean matter theory. Although it was an age in which Europe was coming into greater affluence through the development of matter‐arts like metallurgy, mining, and medicine, high medieval natural philosophy emphasized the “book of nature” as means of spiritual transformation and encounter with the Divine. In this context 13
th Century “science” and
“religion” dialogue provided rational support for Christian spirituality and service. Matter theory served two main roles. First, it provided a rational framework for thinkers like Roger Bacon, Aquinas, and others to address questions about divine action and the limits of human and demonic potential which were raised by the relics, shrines, and miracles (including the Eucharist) then at the forefront of public consciousness. Second, it underpinned the pursuit of rational alchemy as a means of Christian service, concomitantly raising questions about the legitimacy of wealth, power, prestige and the stewardship of money, energy, and time. The paper will conclude by asking why the largely positive aims of 13
th century “science” and religion dialogue stand in contrast to the defensive posture evident in much contemporary popular science and religion dialogue and what, if anything, this difference might indicate about contemporary Western Christianity.
13
IPM- The Behavioral Sciences and Christian Faith II: Illuminating Science-Faith Dialogue
Travis Auditorium 2:10 – 2:40 PM 2:40 – 3:10 PM
Student Characteristics and the Science-Religion Dialogue
Erin I. Smith California Baptist University
A recent survey of CCCU faculty suggests psychology is well‐situated to advance the conversation between science and religion (Council for Christian Colleges & Universities, 2013). Although some of this advance will surely happen at the edge of breakthroughs in neuroscience and the cognitive science of religion, it is likely that a major contribution psychology can make is an increased understanding of the distinct psychological processes underlying belief formation, maintenance, and change as related to current conversations in science and religion. This increased understanding will be vital in advancing science and religion dialogues and in informing our methods of teaching science and religion in the classroom/in science and religion campus clubs.
The current research involved two primary components: (1) survey measurements designed to assess psychological characteristics, including religious belief, understanding of science, personality, beliefs about the relationship between science and religion generally, and about origins specifically, and (2) three in‐person meetings designed to mimic a science and religion club in order to examine the effects of discussion on beliefs about science/religion and origins. Fifteen students completed all of the required survey measurements. Although quantitative analyses are limited by the relatively small sample size, the depth of measurement for each participant will provide some tentative insights into the kinds of beliefs, positions, and characteristics of different kinds of undergraduate students. This presentation will explore these findings, and offer a discussion on students’ reflections on the kinds of topics and activities they desire to see in science and religion discussion forums.
African American Pastors’ Candid Discussions Regarding Addressing Trauma and Violence in Urban
Communities of Need
Jennifer Shepard Payne Azusa Pacific University
Background and Purpose: Urban communities struggle to address trauma, violence, and associated emotional issues. While some communities are resource‐rich, disadvantaged communities often have fewer mental health resources available to them. Urban pastors, by default, are frontline mental health workers. African Americans, in particular, are more likely to discuss issues with their pastor prior to entering a mental health center with PTSD‐related symptoms.
There are few published studies which have sought pastors’ input on their views on how to handle present psychological and societal issues. This study, a John Templeton Foundation funded study, is unique in that it refrains from defining counseling based on mental health/ psychological assumptions or theological assumptions taught in seminaries. Instead, the study’s goal is to discover the lived experience of pastors and how they counsel based upon their own paradigms. Methods: Protestant pastors were invited to participate in 90 minute semi‐structured qualitative interviews. Pastors were solicited via purposive sample, and interviews were done in the community at each pastor’s church location or by phone.
Data on twenty African American pastors who lead churches in low‐income urban areas of Chicago or Los Angeles are presented. Data was audio‐recorded and explored directly from the audio‐taped data with the use of Atlas.ti (phenomenological methodology).
Results: Two themes will be discussed: 1. Pastors discussed serious challenges that occurred in their own lives
prior to entering the pastorate (child abuse, childhood domestic violence experiences, being raised in violent communities, etc.). They discussed how they overcame challenges, and how their challenges shape their present interactions with congregations and community.
2. Pastors discussed the experience of re‐victimization that they themselves presently face due to community violence and they discussed how they have handled it.
Implications: It is hoped that understanding the lived experiences of pastors can inform 1) healthy collaborations between mental health practitioners and community pastors and 2) trauma intervention adaptation for churches in violent communities.
14
IIPM – Science, Faith, & Christian Service, Tom Ferko, Chair
DMin Ray Anderson Classroom in the 490 Building 2:10 – 2:40 PM 2:40 – 3:10 PM
Engaging Science Majors in a Service-Based
Discipleship Program
Thomas E. Ferko and Patrick C. Schact
California Baptist University Believing science majors, as is true for most students, are continuously seeking direction and purpose in how their chosen major relates to their faith in Christ. In this session we will explore how we have engaged small teams of students with majors related to science (~10 students per team) through CBU’s ‘International Service Project (ISP) program over the past 3 years. This program endeavors to disciple college students through a semester‐long program that culminates in a 3‐week long service project in another country. Students on the ‘East Asia Applied Science’ team have worked on water‐related projects in partnership with a faith‐based non‐governmental organization (NGO) that seeks to improve the lives of impoverished rural villagers through providing clean and reliable sources of water and helping to develop sanitation methods appropriate to the villages they live in. Details of the ISP program along with specific information regarding the work that these science‐related teams have performed will be discussed. The discipleship‐based philosophy of this program will also be explored.
Presenting the Gospel in the Lingo of a Scientist
Audrey Chen,
California Institute of Technology
Christians have a lingo of their own. It’s hard for those who are not Christians to understand their vocabulary. Christians use words that others may have heard before, but they seem to use them in a way that refers to something very specific. Similarly, scientists have a lingo of their own. They have their own language. Like a foreign language, certain concepts are expressed in a certain way to mean a certain idea. This presentation explores ways to present the gospel to scientists in the language that scientists understand and are comfortable with.
Key concepts of the gospel will be explained in this talk using ideas, terms and experience familiar to scientists, especially biologists. For example, the talk will present sin as a disease model. Patients can deny the doctor’s diagnosis and the prognosis, but neither the diagnosis nor prognosis is dependent upon the patient’s consent. Jesus’ sacrifice offers a cure and treatment, not just symptomatic relief. Moreover, his sacrifice is both necessary and sufficient. Salvation will be explained both in terms of thresholds and gradients, concepts familiar to developmental biologists. Christian growth will be analogized to mentorship under the ideal Mentor. Christians have a well‐funded, intelligent, and available mentor who doesn’t micromanage but takes an interest in their projects and personal growth. In a world where academic pedigrees matter, Christians have a remarkable pedigree. Although the talk is aimed to equip Christians to explain Christian concepts to scientists, no prior biology knowledge is required. Basic biology terms and concepts will be explained during the talk.
15
IIIPM – Evaluating Proposals about Science & Faith
Psychology Building, room 311 2:10 – 2:40 PM 2:10 – 2:40 PM
“Nuclear Chemistry & Medicine: Why Young-Earthers can’t have it both Ways”
Myron Penner1 and Amanda Nichols2
1. Trinity Western University 2. Oklahoma Christian University
Nuclear chemistry is the study of nuclear reactions that include radioactive decay of isotopes. Radioactive decay can involve a parent isotope changing into a daughter isotope. Each isotope has a unique identifying factor: the half‐life. Half‐life is defined as the time it takes for half of the amount of parent isotope to decay into a daughter isotope. What’s useful to scientists is that no matter the length of half‐life, the proportions are always the same. Therefore, if the relative ratio of parent and daughter isotopes can be measured in a sample, the amount of half‐lives can be calculated resulting in an age of the sample. Nuclear chemistry supports radiometric dating of objects; combined with radiometric dating of moon rocks and meteorites, scientists have calculated the earth to be very old: 4.5 billion years old. There are also many standard medical applications of the scientific principles of radioactive decay, including radiation therapy used to treat cancer, and diagnosing gallbladder malfunction. However, nuclear chemistry poses a challenging dilemma for any who old that the age of the earth is very young—i.e. younger than, say 20,000 years old. This dilemma arises from the following plausible principle: The Parity Principle: If a scientific framework F has
consequences A & B, then if one accepts A on the basis of F one should also accept B.
In our paper, we sketch out the relevant nuclear chemistry, showing its applications to both radiometric dating and medical applications, after which we identify and respond to four objections that might be raised against applying the parity principle to nuclear chemistry, at least insofar as the age of the earth is concerned. For example, one might object to the parity principle based on reasons that are (i) psychological/prudential (ii) philosophical, (iii) scientific, and (iv) theological. We argue that these objections are not successful. We further argue that accepting the parity principle can advance several areas of science/religion conflict, and conclude by pointing out other areas of science and religion in which the parity principle can be applied.
Practical Faith: Facts - Hypothesis - Testing – Evidence
Steve Huffey
Hebrews 11:1, Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. (Auth. Vers., King James Vers.)
‘Reason’ is a term which encompasses science, logic, and other rational tools such as debate. But ‘faith’ is often considered a leap over reason, non‐objective, and irrelevant. Hebrews 11:1 presents a model for faith being an essential tool of empirical rationality, although the scientific method had not yet been developed. Its use of physical words are common to testing, such as the word ‘substance’; in Greek, hupostasis [hupo meaning ‘sub or under’ and stasis meaning ‘stand’]. ‘Sub‐stance’ and hupo‐stasis mean to ‘stand‐under’. A ‘hypothesis’ and its Greek etymology are similar [‘hypo’ meaning ‘under’, and ‘thesis’ ‐ tithenai ‐ ‘to place’: to place under]. A hypothesis is sometimes referred to as an educated ‘guess’ due to research of underlying testable facts. Faith is an educated ‘hope’ supported by underlying facts. Determining what constitutes testable facts is crucial.
Facts are basic to faith and science. ‘Facts’ (Latin, facere, to do, act) develop from ‘acts’, the root of ‘facts’. Similarly, evidentiary rules of jurisprudence and journalism gather substantive acts as facts, usually as the ‘first‐person’. Hearsay is not reliable. The Bible similarly records acts of Jesus and prophets as primary facts, to test and produce evidence.
Unfounded facts in creation science can develop ‘God of the gaps’ fallacies. Enlarging a definition such as ‘science’ can be an attempt to include ‘gaps of facts’. The 2005 ‘Kitzmiller v. Dover ….’ Intelligent Design case was lost due to such an attempt. Its legal opinion will be considered during the presentation for how to improve findings of fact for both science and faith.
At Hebrews 11:1, ‘evidence’ is Gr., elegchos, meaning ‘evidence ‐ proof’. Thus, ‘things’ not ‘seen’ [or observed] are evidenced ‐ proofed. ‘Things’ in the verse is Greek pragma. This is pragmatic. The word ‘faith’, Gr. pistis, has ‘persuasion’ as its main entry in Strong’s Concordance. Its root, peitho, means ‘to convince (by argument)’. Faith is rationally arguable.
Faith and science require theologians and scientists to go forward together. Papers will be available about an exegesis of faith, using New Testament Greek and Old Testament Hebrew.
16
IVAM – Christianity Engaging a Scientific and Technological Culture Psychology Building, room 314
10:30 – 11:30 AM
What Technology Wants: Christian Technologists and Academics Respond to Kevin Kelley
Matt Lumpkin, Ryan Bolger, Matthew Eppinete, and Gerry Picket Fuller Seminary
In his 2010 book, "What Technology Wants," Kevin Kelly argues for several big ideas: that technology is actually, not metaphorically, the ongoing unfolding of the evolutionary process of life; that technological inventions are as inevitable as evolutionary adaptation in biological life; and that new technologies have not and cannot be reliably restricted. While controversial, this perspective on technology‐as‐life has significant implications for Christians who build new technologies as well as those of us who use and are shaped by them. In addition he spends some time describing the ways Amish Christian communities discern the value and impact of new technologies by observing their impact on the lives of a few early adopters.
This panel will feature responses to Kelley from a variety of respondents who build, adopt and support new technologies as well as those who study technology and the ways that the church and the broader world are shaping and being shaped by it. Christian ethics, anthropology, and the eschatology of the singularity are all fair game as we take Kelley as jumping off point for a conversation at the intersection of transhumanism and Christian faith.
17
Poster Session Travis Auditorium Lobby
Oceanic Plastics, Microorganisms, and the Virtue of Moderation: A Semester-long Student Project Sarah M. Richart, Azusa Pacific University
In 2015, the first major study to estimate the amount of land‐based plastic waste entering earth’s oceans revealed that in 2010 alone, approximately 4.8‐12.7 metric tons of plastic were added to marine environments, and the outputs are expected to increase 10‐fold by 2025 [Jambeck, et al, Science, 347 (2015)]. Perhaps not unexpectedly, microorganisms, which normally biodegrade environmental organic polymers, largely seem unable to biodegrade these human‐made plastics. This makes it unlikely that the problem of marine plastic accumulation will sort itself out, and raises many ethical questions surrounding plastic usage. Within a virtue ethics framework and focusing on the virtue of moderation, students in general microbiology courses (both nursing majors and biology majors) were challenged to initially monitor and then limit their personal usage of plastic during the semester. Once the microbiological and ecological problems were discussed in class, students were responsible for keeping an ongoing journal of weekly entries in which they were to reflect on their plastic usage, their awareness of the ubiquity of plastic, and how their self‐imposed limitations affect their lives in an attempt to provide them opportunities for thoughtful but "low stakes" writing assignments. Throughout the semester, plastics were connected to other microbiological topics, like metabolism and microbial growth, as well as larger questions related to the theology of creation.
Westmont College’s Science and Faith Club Kirk Fetters*, Matt Mahler, Rachael Maragliano, Hien Bui, & Stephen Contakes, Westmont College
This past year, a Science and Faith club was started at Westmont College to promote more dialogue on campus about issues at the intersection of Christian faith and contemporary science. Although the club members are united in their commitment to Christian orthodoxy, the club meetings are structured to encourage questions and foster honest discussion rather than promote pre‐existing dogmatic assertions. Our monthly events typically involve a short presentation by a professor in which he or she raises one or more questions related to his or her field. Then, the students and professor meet as coequals to discuss the issue and propose potential solutions to any dilemmas which arise. The issues discussed so far were chosen based on student interest and a desire to avoid topics which students might consider controversial – at least until our club is better established as an edifying forum for dialogue. Thus we’ve discussed the extent to which science should be employed in Christian apologetics; the who, what, where, why, when questions of science‐religion dialogue; whether we might be living in a computer simulation and whether that would have any implications for how we think about the Nicene Creed; and how Christians ought to think about genetic predispositions for disease.
The Science and Religion Club at Point Loma Nazarene University Taylor Steele, Lindsay Semmler, Zachary Beavis, and April Cordero Maskiewicz, Point Loma Nazarene University
Point Loma Nazarene University inaugurated its first Science and Religion Club in the fall of 2015 thanks to support and funding from Oxford Interdisciplinary Seminars in Science and Religion: Bridging the Two Cultures of Science and the Humanities, organized by Scholarship and Christianity in Oxford with funding from Templeton Religion Trust. We will present an overview of our Mission and Vision, our organizational structure, our events to date, and an interesting list of topics of interest elicited from the student membership.
Faith and Science at Fuller Theological Seminary Deb Shepherd,* Reed Metcalf, and Joel Green, Fuller Theological Seminary
Faith and Science at Fuller Theological Seminary is alive and well with an active student group, numerous lectures and events and planning for an expanded presence that will engage and support the broader community. We present an overview of our vision, organization, and activities.
18
Analysis of California Baptist University’s Science and Religion Club Guadalupe Buitron, Jake Love, and Erin I. Smith, California Baptist University
During the fall of 2015, California Baptist University’s Science and Religion club began with two student‐led discussions. The first meeting had 15 students and focused on the integration of faith and reason relying on short video clips of science‐religion debates to promote discussion. The second meeting had 17 students and focused on worldview beliefs about science and religion and used a combination of video and written material to encourage conversation. Research assistants lead the discussions to provide the students a platform where they could engage in dialogues about science and religion without the pressure that may have presented itself if a professor led the discussion. The level of participation in the discussion varied person to person, though overall students reported a high level of engagement. On a 4‐point scale, 73% and 88% students rated that they “somewhat enjoyed it” or “enjoyed it a lot” for the first and second discussion respectively. Additionally, 87% and 100% of these students reported that these kinds of discussions were somewhat or extremely relevant to their faith and their academic studies.
Given these data, we believe that these discussions were a great way to start the science and religion club because they offered a causal yet academic activity to ignite an interest in the topic. Moreover, the small differences between the ratings of students’ enjoyment and perceived relevance of these kinds of discussions may highlight a growing desire to learn about potentially controversial topics through open, informative dialogue compared to dialogue that could be perceived as combative or aggressive, like debates. Additionally, according to data collected after the discussions took place, students indicated that they wish to see more student‐led discussions in a Science and Religion club as well as faculty lectures with a Q and A. We believe this means that students are looking for causal dialogues with their peers where there is less pressure and fear about lack of knowledge, but also academic forums where experts and collegiate professors can offer their expertise on difficult topics.
AreIf nAmfor The interhumjust
Whyrequdid w Who
We is thscripour
Two
For mem The scieenviwith
Sho
AnyowebcatePerselec
Foll
Sub(indi
e you anot, plemerica’sr Christ
Americanrnational ne
manity’s exphow the un
y are we heuired for scwe become
o are we, r
in the Amehe source pture and nenvironmen
o things unit
belief in
a commconsens
those topic
mbers are d
ASA is nonce, Chrisironment in courtesy a
ould I join t
one interesbsite at httpegories of Aspectives octronic-only
ower: Rec
bscriptionsividuals), $8
a membease cos premtians in
n Scientificetwork of Cploration of niverse ope
ere, and wcientific resee this way, a
really?
erican Scienof our abi
nature are mnt.
te the mem
n orthodox C
mitment to msus.
cs on whicdedicated to
ot an advotian faith,
n which diaand respect
the ASA?
sted in the ://network.aASA membon Sciencesubscriptio
eive our fre
s to Perspe85/year (ins
ber of thnsider ier orga
n the Sc
c AffiliationChristians inature, its rates and c
why seeminearch — likand what d
ntific Affiliatlity to pursmutually be
mbers of the
Christianity
mainstream
ch there is o promoting
ocacy orgaor the rela
alogue can t.
If so, what
objectives asa3.org/ abership (ex
e and Chrison.
ee mailings
ectives on stitutions) a
he ASAjoininganizatiociences
n (network.n the scienlaws, and
came into b
gly alone ake curiosityoes that sa
tion believesue knowleeneficial in
e ASA:
y, as defined
m science, th
no conseng ethically a
nization. Wationship bflourish an
t level of m
of the Affiland click onxcept for Fstian Faith.
and meetin
Science aand $20/yea
A? g on s.
.asa3.org), nces. As schow it work
being, but w
among all cy, creativityay about ou
e that God edge — alsdeveloping
d by the Ap
hat is, any s
nsus and fand method
Where therebetween thnd diverse,
membership
liation may n the “join AFollowers) i Student B
ng notices f
nd Christiaar (students
or ASA, cientists, mks. As Chri
why it exists
creatures dy, and a ser relationsh
is both theso, that ho
g a full unde
postles’ and
subject on w
further studdologically s
e is honesthe two, the
even cont
ip is right f
have a paASA” tab uninclude a sBasic and
for ASA an
an Faith (Ps).
was founmembers ofistians, ASAs in the first
do humans nse of purp
hip with God
creator of onest and erstanding
d Nicene cre
which there
dy and anasound rese
t disagreeme ASA stritrasting, ide
for me?
art in the Ander the msubscriptionFamily me
d local cha
PSCF) are
nded in 19f the ASA tAers want tplace.
possess tpose? Whed?
our vast unopen studof human
eeds.
e is a clear
alysis is neearch and d
ment on anves to creeas can be
ASA. Simplembership n to the A
emberships
pters and g
available a
19
941 as antake part into know no
he qualitiesen and how
niverse andies of bothidentity and
scientific
eeded, ASAialogue.
n aspect oeate a safee discussed
ly go to oumenu. A
ASA journalinclude an
groups
at $50/yea
9
n n ot
s w
d h d
A
of e d
r ll , n
r
Studor aregis
Studgradelec
Memstateengithe sciedues
AssfaithASA
Famlaterresid
Full-
FriestatetheyFrie
dent Basicadvanced hstration or s
dent: Premduate progrctronic; eligi
mber: Openement of faineering, higenerally rnce are ves are $85/y
sociate meh. AssociateA except vo
mily member you will bding at the
-time overs
end: An indement of fay qualify. Alnd dues are
c: Available igh school scholarship
mier membram or advible for ann
n to all persaith. Sciencistory, mathrecognizedery welcomyear.
ember: Avaes receive ating and ho
ers may quabe able to ssame addr
eas missio
dividual or aith may bell benefits fe the same
free of chastudents;
p
bership avavanced highual meeting
sons with ace is interphematics, m science d
me. Membe
ailable to inall memberolding office
alify for a reselect "famess. The P
onaries are
r student wecome a Ffor each mee as the sele
arge to anyoElectronic
ailable at $h school stg free regis
at least a bapreted broamedicine, pdisciplines. rs have vo
nterested nor benefits ae. Associate
educed ratemily" rates. PSCF subsc
e entitled to
wishing to riend of theembership ected mem
one enrollepublication
$20/year totudents; Pr
stration and
achelor’s deadly to inclpolitical scie
Philosopheoting privile
onscientistsnd publicate member d
e of $15/yeFamily me
criptioin is e
o a complim
participate e ASA. Frietype applybership typ
ed in an unds only; not
o anyone erint copies
d scholarshi
egree in sclude anthroence, psychers and th
eges and c
s who can tions and tadues are $8
ear. Select yembers are electronic-o
mentary mem
in the ASends may sy except forpe.
dergraduatet eligible fo
enrolled in of PSCF a
ip
ience who opology, arhology, andeologians w
can hold of
give asseake part in 85/year.
your requesdefined as
nly.
mbership.
SA withoutselect the mr voting righ
e or graduaor annual m
an undergare offered
can give asrcheology, d sociologywho are inffice. Regul
nt to our sall of the a
sted membs househol
t giving assmembershihts and ho
20
ate programmeeting free
graduate o as well as
ssent to oueconomics
y as well asnterested inlar Membe
tatement oaffairs of the
ber type andd members
sent to ouip for whichlding office
0
m e
r s
r s, s n r
of e
d s
r h
e.