Determining the meaning of life is a difficult task, but discussing your beliefs with someone who disagrees with you can be even harder.
An atheist philosopher and a Christian chemist did just that Thursday in the Idaho Commons.
At the event, titled “Why are we here?” and mediated by New Saint Andrews College philosophy teacher Mitch Stokes, Bert Baumgaertner and Troy Van Voorhis discussed what they believed the human purpose was along with their own personal beliefs.
Irish Martos | Argonaut
University of Idaho philosophy professor Bert Baumgaertner discusses purpose and beliefs at The Veritas Forum’s “Why Are We Here?” Thursday in the Idaho Commons.
When Baumgaertner was asked to participate in the forum, he said he requested that it wouldn”t be a debate. Instead Van Voorhim and Baumgaertner discussed their differing viewpoints without trying to influence the other”s views.
Van Voorhis is a professor of chemistry at MIT and a Christian. Van Voorhis compared some general religious beliefs to the study of chemistry, saying both had “unseen truths,” and if one follows these truths, they can be cured of illness. In terms of chemistry, the unseen truths can be something such as molecules, and the study of these truths can lead to the creation of medicine, which can cure illness.
Van Voorhis said the Christian faith and science interact. He said Christianity is about more than just observable facts, but giving those facts shape and meaning. He said science is observing facts, interpreting them and giving them meaning.
Van Voorhis went on to say that the most important questions in life, such as life”s purpose, often have multiple layers of meaning.
“If there”s only one answer to a question, it”s a pretty uninteresting question,” Van Voorhis said.
Baumgaertner is an assistant professor of philosophy at UI. Baumgaertner said he likes to describe himself as a “recovering Christian” rather than as an atheist.
Baumgaertner said people have a tendency to believe the first thing they are exposed to.
“How things seem don”t always reflect how they are,” Baumgaertner argued.
Baumgaertner said he believes that being aware of life”s frailty makes it that much more special. He said it gives a sense of humility to realize how “small and insignificant” our lives are compared to the universe and that we only have these “fleeting moments.”
Van Voorhis and Baumgaertner went on to discuss their ideas with each other, with Stokes providing transitions to keep the conversation going.
A main subject of their discussion was how morality was determined for those who are religious and those who are not. Baumgaertner said he believed good and bad can be determined by how one determines pleasure and pain. Van Voorhis rebutted saying he doesn”t believe in using pleasure and pain as a way of determining good and bad since there are pleasurable activities that aren”t necessarily good. Van Voorhis said that he does believe that atheists can develop a good moral code apart from God, but to Christians, God is the good.
Marisa Casella can be reached at [email protected]– or on Twitter at @marisacasella1