Page Content (OCR)
256 Near 50 years ago, Shapley proposed that anthropocentric religions have an opportunity for aggrandizement through incorporating a sensibility of the newly revealed cosmos. “If the theologian finds it difficult to take seri- ously our insistence that the god of humanity is the god of gravitation and the god of hydrogen atoms, at least he may be willing to consider the rea- sonableness of extending to the higher sentient beings that have evolved elsewhere . .. the same intellectual or spiritual rating he gives to us.”* The future of a rapprochement between Christianity and evolution, phi- losopher Michael Ruse suggested, is with the development of a “theology of nature” that appreciates and rejoices in evolution, whether or not evolu- tion is conceived of as God’s work. Steven Dick, who foresaw “cosmotheol- ogy” as the ultimate reconciliation of science and religion, speculated that the God of the next millennium may be a Natural God of cosmic evolution and the biological universe. Cosmotheology, he presumed, must have a moral dimension extended to include all species in the universe—a rever- ence and respect for extraterrestrial intelligence that may be very different from terrestrial life-forms. Jastrow contended that science already has provided some elements of a natural religion, with a cosmology (the scientific theory of the universe’s origin) and a moral theory (adversity and struggle lie at the root of evolu- tionary progress).*” Many find that moral theory—and its ethical infer- ences—to be troubling. Consider the implications it would have in a direct encounter between our civilization and a more powerful one. Is a melding of science and theology feasible? Many religious leaders acknowledge the validity of the scientific approach, although perhaps not for all questions. Several scientists have suggested that more metaphysical perspectives on cosmology are emerging in the face of what presently seems unknowable. However, we are far from a general unified theory that embraces both science and religion. An information-rich message from extraterrestrials with a science-based world view will, over time, undermine our own world’s religions, predicted Jill Tarter. Because new information about the universe is observationally verifiable, humans will be converted to the revealed, superior religion, even if its practices are at first repugnant. Subsequent generations, who mature with the knowledge of other technologies having long histories and no apparent need for religion, will find it harder and harder to subscribe to unique terrestrial beliefs. The only real possibility for less than total con- version arises from any ambiguities in the message and its decoding, leading perhaps to multiple sects.** Cosmotheological beliefs could undermine human status. We already know that we are not physically central; we probably are not biologically central either. Uniqueness of form may not make us the special object of attention of any deity. After contact, Dick predicted, we will never return Mixed Emotions Cosmotheology, and Cosmic Ethics