This Thesis Has Been Submitted in Fulfilment of the Requirements for a Postgraduate Degree (E.G
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
This thesis has been submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for a postgraduate degree (e.g. PhD, MPhil, DClinPsychol) at the University of Edinburgh. Please note the following terms and conditions of use: This work is protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights, which are retained by the thesis author, unless otherwise stated. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the author. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the author. When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given. WITH GOD IN MIND: DIVINE ACTION AND THE NATURALISATION OF CONSCIOUSNESS BY SARAH LANE RITCHIE DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY THE UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH 2017 2 3 Declaration: I, Sarah Lane Ritchie, hereby certify that this thesis has been written by me; that it is the record of work carried out by me; and that it has not been submitted in any previous application for higher degree. Signature ______________________________ Date ______________________________ 4 5 To My Mom and Dad 6 7 Abstract This thesis addresses the question of divine action in the mind: Is human consciousness a uniquely nonphysical causal joint wherein divine intentions meet natural realities without contravening lawlike physical processes? It is argued that consciousness is not uniquely spiritual but wholly natural (and possibly physical). However, this need not lead to the conclusion that divine action in the mind does not occur. Rather, this thesis argues that noninterventionist causal joint programs (such as those privileging the mind as uniquely open to divine action) are both scientifically implausible and theologically insufficient, resting on questionable metaphysical presuppositions that are not necessitated by either theology or the natural sciences. By discarding the God-nature model implied by contemporary noninterventionist divine action theories, one is freed up to explore theological and metaphysical alternatives for understanding divine action in the mind (and elsewhere). It is argued that a theologically robust theistic naturalism offers a more compelling vision of divine action in the mind than that offered by standard causal joint theories. By affirming that to be fully natural is to be involved with God’s active presence, one is then free to affirm divine action not only in the human mind, but throughout the natural world. This thesis is divided into two parts. Part One engages with the scientific and philosophical literature surrounding human consciousness, and uses debates about the nature of the mind to offer a sustained analysis and critique of what is termed the “standard model” of divine action. It is argued that the noninterventionist, incompatibilist model of divine action that has spurred the development of various causal joint theories is scientifically and theologically insufficient, and that this is seen particularly clearly in recent theories locating (and constraining) divine action in the emergent human mind. Chapter 2 analyses the contemporary divine action scene, arguing that the standard model presumes noninterventionism, incompatibilism, and a high view of the laws of nature. However, the God-world relationship implied by this model is theologically insufficient. Chapter 3 examines Philip Clayton’s divine action theory, which locates divine action in the emergent human mind and is the latest manifestation of the causal joint model described in Chapter 2. After using emergence theory itself to critique Clayton’s approach, the thesis then examines the philosophy and science of consciousness, in Chapters 4 and 5. It is suggested that a physicalist understanding of the mind is a well-supported position. Part Two of the thesis reframes divine action in the mind within an explicitly theological framework. The thesis does this by analysing what is termed the “theological turn” in divine action debates – the recent tendency to react against standard causal joint theories by rejecting the idea that science can say anything about how and whether divine action occurs. Proponents of the theological turn instead understand divine action from explicitly theological perspectives, affirming compatibilist models in which God is seen to work in, through, and with natural processes – precisely because God is never absent from nature in the first place. Such an approach allows theologians to accept physicalist explanations of the mind, precisely because all the natural world is necessarily involved with God. Chapter 6 introduces this theological turn by exploring various versions of naturalism, ultimately suggesting that neither philosophy nor science mandates the sort of metaphysical naturalism assumed not only by those who deny divine action, but (ironically) noninterventionist divine action theorists as well. Chapters 7, 8, and 9 then introduce, compare, and contrast three different versions of strong theistic naturalism: Thomism, panentheistic naturalism, and pneumatological naturalism. While each of these explicitly theological frameworks is distinctive, they share an affirmation of the intimate relationship between God’s immanent, active presence in the natural world, and suggest the naturalised mind as a relatively intense locus of divine action, as human minds actively participate in and with God. It is concluded that the participatory ontology supported by these theistic naturalisms does, after all, suggest the mind as a locus of intensified divine action – but for very different reasons than those motivating causal joint theorists. 8 9 Acknowledgements A PhD is a curious thing. Years of study and debate, conferences and papers, chance encounters and surprise discoveries – these culminate in a single document that could not possibly convey the sort of intellectual and personal growth accompanying its production. I am deeply indebted to so many who have contributed to this experience. Above all, I am immensely grateful for my supervisor, Dr Mark Harris. Frankly, I cannot imagine a better supervisor – his remarkable scholarship, astute insight, and willingness to challenge me are largely responsible for anything of value in this thesis. He has encouraged me to be the sort of critical thinker and intellectually honest scholar I hope to be. Beyond the thesis itself, his mentorship and kindness have been truly invaluable and formative for me as a person – I am truly fortunate to have been his student, and now colleague. The University of Edinburgh has funded my PhD studies through a Principal’s Career Development Scholarship. I am thankful for this. I am grateful for the insights and advice of my secondary supervisor, Dr Mark Sprevak, whose scientific and philosophical expertise have “kept me honest.” Conversations with other academics in science-and-religion have proved invaluable during my PhD studies. Many thanks to Dr Chris Knight for conversations and email exchanges that have both broadened and sharpened my thinking, to Professor Neil Spurway for his constructive critiques and warm encouragement, and to colleagues at St Mary’s, the School of Divinity at The University of St Andrews – their encouragement and dialogue have been so helpful over the last several months. I am also grateful to the writers and scholars at BioLogos, and Dr Jim Stump in particular, for the opportunity to engage with a wide audience outside of academia. I am particularly grateful to the Very Reverend Professor Iain Torrance, who has known, encouraged, and supported me first at Princeton Theological Seminary, and now in Scotland. His mentorship and kindness have been undeservedly generous, and I cannot imagine a more astute or caring theologian from whom to learn. I am proud to be associated with him. I am similarly thankful to the Church of Scotland, which has welcomed me as one of its own. In particular, Rev Dr Richard Frazer has been a wonderful minister and friend. I am also thankful to the Theological Forum, which has sharpened my thinking and encouraged my empathy. The staff and students of New College have provided an incredible academic home for me, and I am grateful for the warm, vibrant, intellectually rigorous, and welcoming environment that the School of Divinity has fostered. I am particularly thankful for the encouraging leadership of Professor Susan Hardman Moore and Professor Paul Foster, and the constant support of the administrative staff. The student community has enriched my mind and life, and I am so grateful for the friendship of Teresa and Paul McCaskill, Elisabeth Corsar, Anja Pogacnik, Antonia Thora, Joshua and Lindsay Bruce, and a great many others. Though she is not in Scotland, I must mention “my person,” Jacqueline Naperola Johnson, whose brilliant intellect and depth of spirit make her a true kindred spirit and lifelong co-conspirator. 10 I am also grateful for my past academic communities. Spring Arbor University molded my mind and character, and taught me how to think. I am particularly thankful for Dr Ken Brewer, who introduced me to the world of theology, convinced me to leave pre-medical studies, and encouraged me to pursue postgraduate work. I am forever grateful for his mentorship, and for that of Dr Tom Kuntzleman, Dr Tom Holsinger-Friesen, and Dr Chris Newhouse. Similarly, Princeton Theological Seminary played a pivotal and formative role in my academic and personal development. In particular, I am deeply indebted to Professor Wentzel van Huyssteen, who introduced me to the world of science-and-religion and has supported me every step of the way. Professor Richard Osmer was also influential, and Professor Robert Dykstra is responsible for igniting my interests in the relationship between mind, body, and theology. I am also continually grateful for the friendship of Dr Blair Bertrand. I have the best father in the world. Charlie Lane has not only funded my immensely expensive education, but has been both a father and a mother, a kindred spirit, co-adventurer, and fellow dreamer.