Science and the Catholic FaithOrigins of the Universe

Core RE

Name: _______________________

RE DEPARTMENT – KS5 CORE RE UNIT PLAN

UNIT TOPIC: Science and the Catholic Faith DURATION: 6 lessons

LEARNING OUTCOMES SKILLS

Students will address: -Lesson 1 – Science and the Catholic Faith -Is there a conflict? Lesson 2 – Creatio Ex Nihlio- Can the universe be created from nothing?Lesson 3 – Evolution Is the theory of Evl0olution compatible with the Catholic Faith Lesson 4 – Contingent and necessary existence -does the universe need a creator?Lesson 5- Awe and Wonder – Why do we feel Awe? What are its effects? Lesson 6 – Assessment Are Science and Faith Compatible?

recall, select and deploy specified knowledge; identify, investigate and analyse questions and issues arising from the course of study; use appropriate language and terminology in context; interpret and evaluate religious concepts, issues and ideas, the relevance of arguments and the views of scholars; communicate, using reasoned arguments substantiated by evidence; demonstrate a wider range and greater depth of knowledge and understanding, a greater maturity of thought and expression and more developed analytical skills.

KEY TERMINOLOGY

Scientism, creationism, ex nihilo, goldilocks enigma, contingent, necessary, evolution, special creation, image of God, awe, wonder.

LINKS TO CURRICULUM DIRECTORY & CATECHISM

Teaching and learning strategies which enable pupils to develop knowledge and understanding to critically analyse, evaluate and show a coherent understanding of:

The Church’s teaching about faith (e.g. gift, virtue) and the place of reason in the search for God;

.2.4. Understanding scripture (105-119)The Bible in relation to science and history (37, 159, 1960) a The Church teaches us how to relate truths of faith to scienceb There can be no conflict between religious truth and scientific and historical truth (159) c The difference between the Catholic understanding of Scripture and that of those who interpret the Bible in an overly literalist, fundamentalist way or with an approach limited to a symbolic or naturalistic understanding1.3.1. The Creation of the World and our First Parents (54, 279-282) A Revelation as found in the book of Genesis. a Understanding literary forms in Scripture (289) b Genesis 1–11 conveys religious truth rather than science (283-289) c The book reveals truth about which science and history can only speculate d Scripture’s use of figurative and symbolic language in Genesis 1–11 (362, 375, 390, 396) B The Trinitarian God is the Creator of all; all creation reflects the glory of God (290-295, 301)C God created all that is, seen and unseen a Unseen or invisible world: angels (325-336) b Seen or visible world.

`

Measuring progress after GCSE: Level 1 / Level 2: sub-AS level`` Level 3: if you achieved a C grade at GCSE, you

should be working on and above a level 3 Level 4: if you achieved a B grade at GCSE, you

should be working on and above a level 4 Level 5: if you achieved an A/A*grade at GCSE, you

should be working on a level 5

Making progress in CORE RE REYou are working towards addressing the following question

‘science and faith are incompatible’ Discuss

Lesson 1 – Science and the Catholic Faith -Is there a conflict?

Starter: Statement Agree?

A Science disproves religionB Religion cannot teach you anythingC Religion is against new scientific discoveriesD You can’t believe both science and religionE You need religion to make this a better worldF Science and religion are different ways of looking at the world, but

both have something to teach us

Task: Using the examples on vaccinations, Explain the problems with a ‘golden thread’.…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

The religious authorities of Jenner’s day viewed smallpox

inoculation as an affront to God and man. A widely

published British sermon was titled “The Dangerous and Sinful Practice of Inoculation.” American clergy warned that inoculation usurped God’s power to decide the beginning and end of life. Only hypocrites would undergo the procedure and still pray to God, one theologian declared.

Christian theologian Jonathan Edwards felt strongly about the small pox vaccination. He wanted all his pupils to be vaccinated. He himself a was given an early version of

the vaccination and died as a result

George Bernard Shaw was an influential

(atheist) playwright in the early 20th

century. He called vaccinations “a peculiarly filthy piece of witchcraft.”

Explain using: • The difference between Scientism and Creationism • The kettle or aquarium analogy. • Mary Midgely’ s conceptual toolboxes.

Why the Conflict between science and faith can be seen to be a myth ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Task: Look at this passage carefully, which parts of it support the idea of ex nihilo and are there any that do not?

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was without form and void, darkness was on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.3 And God said, ‘Let there be light,’ and there was light. 

Lesson 2 - Ex Nihilo

• In GCSE Science, you will have studied the Big Bang theory, it is part of the Core Science course.

• In case you don’t remember, read the handout. As you read it, highlight any ex nihilo statements or ideas in one colour. In another colour, highlight words or ideas that are new to you or that you don’t understand.

Big Bang Theory - The PremiseThe Big Bang theory is an effort to explain what happened at the very beginning of our universe. Discoveries in astronomy and physics have shown beyond a reasonable doubt that our universe did in fact have a beginning. Prior to that moment there was nothing; during and after that moment there was something: our universe. The big bang theory is an effort to explain what happened during and after that moment.

According to the standard theory, our universe sprang into existence as a "singularity" around 13.7 billion years ago. What is a "singularity" and where does it come from? Well, to be honest, we don't know for sure. Singularities are zones which defy our current understanding of physics. They are thought to exist at the core of "black holes." Black holes are areas of intense gravitational pressure. The pressure is thought to be so intense that finite matter is actually squished into infinite density (a mathematical concept which truly boggles the mind). These zones of infinite density are called "singularities." Our universe is thought to have begun as an infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something - a singularity. Where did it come from? We don't know. Why did it appear? We don't know.

After its initial appearance, it apparently inflated (the "Big Bang"), expanded and cooled, going from very, very small and very, very hot, to the size and temperature of our current universe. It continues to expand and cool to this day and we are inside of it: incredible creatures living on a unique planet, circling a beautiful star clustered together with several hundred billion other stars in a galaxy soaring through the cosmos, all of which is inside of an expanding universe that began as an infinitesimal singularity which appeared out of nowhere for reasons unknown. This is the Big Bang theory.

Big Bang Theory - Common MisconceptionsThere are many misconceptions surrounding the Big Bang theory. For example, we tend to imagine a giant explosion. Experts however say that there was no explosion; there was (and continues to be) an expansion. Rather than imagining a balloon popping and releasing its contents, imagine a balloon expanding: an infinitesimally small balloon expanding to the size of our current universe.

Another misconception is that we tend to image the singularity as a little fireball appearing somewhere in space. According to the many experts however, space didn't exist prior to the Big Bang. Back in the late '60s and early '70s, when men first walked upon the moon, "three British astrophysicists, Steven Hawking, George Ellis, and Roger Penrose turned their attention to the Theory of Relativity and its implications regarding our notions of time. In 1968 and 1970, they published papers in which they extended Einstein's Theory of General Relativity to include measurements of time and space.1, 2 According to their calculations, time and space

had a finite beginning that corresponded to the origin of matter and energy."3 The singularity didn't appear in space; rather, space began inside of the singularity. Prior to the singularity, nothing existed, not space, time, matter, or energy - nothing. So where and in what did the singularity appear if not in space? We don't know. We don't know where it came from, why it's here, or even where it is. All

we really know is that we are inside of it and at one time it didn't exist and neither did we.

Big Bang Theory - Evidence for the Theory.What are the major evidences which support the Big Bang theory?

First of all, we are reasonably certain that the universe had a beginning. Second, galaxies appear to be moving away from us at speeds proportional to their

distance. This is called "Hubble's Law," named after Edwin Hubble (1889-1953) who discovered this phenomenon in 1929. This observation supports the expansion of the universe and suggests that the universe was once compacted.

Third, if the universe was initially very, very hot as the Big Bang suggests, we should be able to find some remnant of this heat. In 1965, Radio astronomers Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson discovered a 2.725 degree Kelvin (-454.765 degree Fahrenheit, -270.425 degree Celsius) Cosmic Microwave Background radiation (CMB) which pervades the observable universe. This is thought to be the remnant which scientists were looking for. Penzias and Wilson shared in the 1978 Nobel Prize for Physics for their discovery.

Finally, the abundance of the "light elements" Hydrogen and Helium found in the observable universe are thought to support the Big Bang model of origins.

Big Bang Theory - The Only Plausible Theory?Is the standard Big Bang theory the only model consistent with these evidences? No, it's just the most popular one. Internationally renown Astrophysicist George F. R. Ellis explains: "People need to be aware that there is a range of models that could explain the observations….For instance, I can construct you a spherically symmetrical universe with Earth at its centre, and you cannot disprove it based on observations….You can only exclude it on philosophical grounds. In my

view there is absolutely nothing wrong in that. What I want to bring into the open is the fact that we are using philosophical criteria in choosing our models. A lot of cosmology tries to hide that."4

In 2003, Physicist Robert Gentry proposed an attractive alternative to the standard theory, an alternative which also accounts for the evidences listed above.5 Dr. Gentry claims that the standard Big Bang model is founded upon a faulty paradigm (the Friedmann-lemaitre expanding-space-time paradigm) which he claims is inconsistent with the empirical data. He chooses instead to base his model on Einstein's static-spacetime paradigm which he claims is the "genuine cosmic Rosetta." Gentry has published several papers outlining what he considers to be serious flaws in the standard Big Bang model.6 Other high-profile dissenters include Nobel laureate Dr. Hannes Alfvén, Professor Geoffrey Burbidge, Dr. Halton Arp, and the renowned British astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle, who is accredited with first coining the term "the Big Bang" during a BBC radio broadcast in 1950.

Big Bang Theory - What about God?Any discussion of the Big Bang theory would be incomplete without asking the question, what about God? This is because cosmogony (the study of the origin of the universe) is an area where science and theology meet. Creation was a supernatural event. That is, it took place outside of the natural realm. This fact begs the question: is there anything else which exists outside of the natural realm? Specifically, is there a master Architect out there? We know that this universe had a beginning. Was God the "First Cause"? We won't attempt to answer that question in this short article. We just ask the question.

(Article from www.coursehero.com)

Task: As you watch the clip that follows, think about which of the models might match the idea of ours being the Universe that is ‘just right’ for life

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

“Did God create the Universe ex nihilo?”Discussion notes to feedback………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Lesson 3 - Evolution Indicate on the spectrum below:

1. What is your view? 2. What is the Church’s view on evolution?

Read the quotes below and work out what the Church believes:

Quote What view of evolution does it suggest?St. Augustine, 4th A.D. “God has implanted in each organism an organising principle, a ratio seminalis, that ensures its change and development, according to a latent pattern laid down, once for all, at the time of Creation.”

Catechism of the Catholic Church, 366 “The Church teaches that every spiritual soul is created immediately by God - it is not "produced" by the parents - and also that it is immortal: it does not perish when it separates from the body at death, and it will be reunited with the body at the final Resurrection”.Pope Pius XII (150, Humani GenerisThe doctrine of evolution…inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter – but the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God. Pope Francis“When we read the account of Creation in Genesis, we risk imagining that God was a magician, complete with an all powerful magic wand. But that was not so. He created beings and he let them develop according to the internal laws with which He endowed each one, that they might develop, and reach their fullness. He gave autonomy to the beings of the universe at the same time He assured them of his continual presence.”

Evolution of Animal PartsOrganisms can be found which show earlier stages of development of the complex mammal eye.

1. What factors drive such change? Why don’t all animals develop their eyes to the later stages?

2. Limbs have also evolved, from fins, to legs and hands. Do the shading activity on the next page

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………………….…………………………………….…………………………………………………………………..

3. Why do you think humans have a small tail bone? (a coccyx)

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

How do you think humans evolved?] ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

3. Genetic Similarity Activity

What percentage of genes do we have in common with…

- Cows

- Chickens- Cats - mouse - fruit fly- banana

Pick out one bone, colour it in, and pick out the same bone in the different organisms

Do the 3 types of evidence persuade you to accept evolution? Which evidence is the most persuasive?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

How do you think humans evolved?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

4. Divine Image Activity

Star those features which stand out as making man unique.

• The divine image is present in every man.• In having a spiritual and immortal soul, the human person is the only creature on earth

that God has willed for its own sake. • From his conception, he is destined for eternal beatitude and participates in the light

and power of the divine Spirit. • By his reason, he is capable of understanding the order of things established by the

Creator. • He is endowed with freedom, an "outstanding manifestation of the divine image. By

free will, he is capable of directing himself toward his true good. • He finds his perfection "in seeking and loving what is true and good. • Man is capable of recognizing the voice of God which urges him "to do what is good and

avoid what is evil.”

• Man can exist in such a communion with others, that he reflects the loving, self-giving unity that exists among God as three Persons.

(Source:Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1702ff)

How do you see man? As basically an animal, or as different from an animal? How?

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

5. Man as made in the image of God (St.Catherine of Siena)

Do humans have the capacity and potential to be different from animals? Is this anything to do with our spiritual capacity to recognize and reflect God?

Discussion Notes

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Using the sources from today’s lesson

Explain how a Catholic can believe: • God created the world• Evolution is happening• Human beings are unique

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………

Lesson 4 - The Existence of the UniverseWas there a Beginning?

Early thinking on the creation of the universe could be summed up by Aristotle’s view that matter is eternal, it has always existed. During the early 20 th century scientists began to question this view. In 1915 Einstein introduced the General Theory of Relativity. He proposed that space and time could not be considered as a backdrop to events, they were not eternal. The universe should be described without reference to ‘pre-universe’; there should be no consideration of time before the creation of the universe, as time did not exist. Space, time and matter were not eternal. Various advances (almost in isolation) by scientists such as Lemaître, Friedmann and Hubble began to show how the universe could result from a single event. This thought challenged the belief that the universe must exist in a constant eternal state. One scientist in particular, Georges Lemaître, a Catholic priest, formulated early views of what became to be known as the ‘Big Bang’ theory. In the 1920s Lemaître sowed the early seeds of an idea that slowly developed into a theory that suggested some 13.8 billion years ago the universe was an incredibly dense mass that immediately began to expand and cool. All the material in existence today resulted from early interactions between mass and energy. Essentially all matter was created in the first few seconds after the Big Bang. Advances by Edwin Hubble in 1929 showed galaxies were moving further away from earth supporting the view of an expanding universe. Although this evidence began to emerge, some scientists were

Take two colour pens

Highlight information that supports:

The universe had no beginning- Colour 1Thinkers in support of this view:

Highlight information that supports:

The universe had a beginning- Colour 2Thinkers in support of this view:

slow to embrace this new paradigm; notable individuals such as Fred Hoyle, were sceptical and wished to maintain a ‘steady state’ view of the universe. Hoyle in 1948, working with Thomas Gold and Hermann Bondi, developed their thinking of the steady state universe to suggest an evolving universe that although expanding, essentially remained the same! They contended that new galaxies would come into existence to fill the gaps formed as the universe expanded. In this model, new material must be created continually and not from a single event, the creation of the universe. Hoyle, Gold and Bondi did not offer an explanation as to how the universe came into being!

Scientists remained divided until the 1960s when cosmic background radiation (CMBR) was discovered and attributed to energy created just after the Big Bang. This discovery and subsequent developments in understanding of CMBR resulted in a shift of opinion in support of the Big Bang theory. There was a single event at which all the raw materials needed for the universe as we see it today were created.

Definitions

Contingent: ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Necessary:

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Challenges to the idea that the Universe needs a Cause

David Hume’s criticisms. • He believed that all knowledge and ideas, however complex, can be reduced to some experience that our senses provided.• Hume’s examination of people’s mode of thinking led him to conclude that humans think they know a great deal more about the external world than is warranted.• Hume argued that the mistake humans make is to allow imagination to make a connection between cause and effect.• For Hume, therefore, Aquinas is wrong in making a connection between cause and effect.• Aquinas has observed cause and effect around him and the existence of the universe.• His error, Hume is arguing, is to join those two events together when they are in fact two separate events.• It is just the habit of the mind that has made the connection between the two events; it is induction.

Hume implies two possibilities:1. That the universe could simply be ‘brute fact’. That is we do not require a first cause.2. A beginning does not automatically mean God was responsible.

• Hume argued that the fundamental premise of the Cosmological Argument that every event must have a cause could be neither be proved not established.• Hume argued that as we have no direct experience of the creation of the universe we could not speak meaningfully about it.

Bertrand Russell’s criticisms. • In 1947 there was a famous BBC radio debate between the Christian Philosopher FrederickCopleston and the famous atheist Bertrand Russell.• Russell refused to accept two key underlying assumptions of the Cosmological argument:

1. The assumption that the universe is contingent or dependent on something outside the universe for its existence• Russell refused to use the terms `contingent` and `dependence` with reference to the universe.

• He famously argued: “I should say that the universe is just there, and that is all.”• What he meant by this was that he accepted the existence of the universe as just a brute fact – he felt no need to ask why it is there or what caused it to be there.• Russell says that Copleston and Aquinas commit a fallacy of composition because they apply what is true for an individual being to the whole of the said being.• He uses the analogy that every human has a mother, but this does not mean that the human race as a whole has a mother.• Peter Vardy adds to this and says that 'one cannot move from individual causes to a claim that the totality of all has a cause'.

2. The assumption that there must be a complete explanation for the existence of the universe.• Russell rejected the idea that there has to be a complete explanation for the universe.• Russell did not feel the need to enquire any further than the brute, material existence of the universe.• He believed that things in the universe `just are`: everything does not require an explanation.• Russell supports the possibility of infinite regress.• His arguments count against not only Copleston but also Aquinas. • He does not agree that the universe must have had a beginning; instead he argues that there may be no reason for the existence of the universe.• If Russell was pushed by being told that “everything requires an explanation” he could turn the tables on the Cosmological argument and say “if everything requires an explanation, what is the explanation for God?”

The view of Richard Dawkins

"The universe could so easily have remained lifeless and simple -just physics and chemistry, just the scattered dust of the cosmic explosion that gave birth to time and space. The fact that it did not -the fact that life evolved out of literally nothing, some 10 billion years after the universe evolved literally out of nothing -is a fact so staggering that I would be mad to attempt words to do it justice.

Does the Universe Need a Cause? Weighing up the Arguments

©

20

Summarise Aquinas’ cosmological argument:

The argument from Contingency:

Leibniz

Challenges from Hume:

Russell:

My Evaluation of these challenges:My Evaluation of these arguments:

Krauss and Hawking:

My Evaluation of this position:

Who do you agree with? Can the Universe be the cause of its own self? Justify your answer?

Do science and religion need to work together to find the answer?

Lesson 5 – AweWhat is awe? ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Respond to the clips, pictures and information you are about to see….

Why are they awesome?

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Read the Article Why Do We Experience Awe?

Using three different colour pens highlight information on • Why we feel Awe?• What is the impact of Awe? • How to have awesome experiences

21

Why Do We Experience Awe? By PAUL PIFF and DACHER KELTNER MAY 22, 2015

HERE’S a curious fact about goose bumps. In many nonhuman mammals, goose bumps — that physiological reaction in which the muscles surrounding hair follicles contract — occur when individuals, along with other members of their species, face a threat. We humans, by contrast, can get goose bumps when we experience awe, that often-positive feeling of being in the presence of something vast that transcends our understanding of the world.

Why do humans experience awe? Years ago, one of us, Professor Keltner, argued (along with the psychologist Jonathan Haidt) that awe is the ultimate “collective” emotion, for it motivates people to do things that enhance the greater good. Through many activities that give us goose bumps — collective rituals, celebration, music and dance, religious gatherings and worship — awe might help shift our focus from our narrow self-interest to the interests of the group to which we belong.Now, recent research of ours, to be published in next month’s issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, provides strong empirical support for this claim. We found that awe helps bind us to others, motivating us to act in collaborative ways that enable strong groups and cohesive communities.

For example, in one study we asked more than 1,500 individuals across the United States a series of questions to assess how much awe, among other emotions, they experienced on a regular basis. In an ostensibly unrelated part of the study, we gave each person 10 lottery tickets that would be entered in his (or her) name for a cash prize drawing. We told each person that the tickets were his to keep, but that if he wanted to, he could share a portion of them with another unidentified individual in the study who had not received any tickets.

We found that participants who reported experiencing more awe in their lives, who felt more regular wonder and beauty in the world around them, were more generous to the stranger. They gave approximately 40 percent more of their tickets away than did participants who were awe-deprived.

Some of this research was conducted on the campus of the University of California, Berkeley, which has a spectacular grove of Tasmanian blue gum eucalyptus trees, some with heights exceeding 200 feet — a potent source of everyday awe for anyone who walks by. So we took participants there and had them either look up into the trees or look at the facade of a nearby science building, for one minute. Then, a minor “accident” occurred (actually a planned part of the experiment): A person stumbled and dropped a handful of pens. Participants who had spent the minute looking up at the tall trees — not long, but long enough, we found, to be filled with awe — picked up more pens to help the other person.

22

Opinion TodayEvery weekday, get thought-provoking commentary from Op-Ed columnists, The Times editorial board and contributing writers from around the world.other experiments, we evoked feelings of awe in the lab, for example by having participants recall and write about a past experience of awe or watch a five-minute video of sublime scenes of nature. Participants experiencing awe, more so than those participants experiencing emotions like pride or amusement, cooperated more, shared more resources and sacrificed more for others — all of which are behaviors necessary for our collective life.

In still other studies, we have sought to understand why awe arouses altruism of different kinds. One answer is that awe imbues people with a different sense of themselves, one that is smaller, more humble and part of something larger. Our research finds that even brief experiences of awe, such as being amid beautiful tall trees, lead people to feel less narcissistic and entitled and more attuned to the common humanity people share with one another. In the great balancing act of our social lives, between the gratification of self-interest and a concern for others, fleeting experiences of awe redefine the self in terms of the collective, and orient our actions toward the needs of those around us.

You could make the case that our culture today is awe-deprived. Adults spend more and more time working and commuting and less time outdoors and with other people. Camping trips, picnics and midnight skies are forgone in favour of working weekends and late at night. Attendance at arts events — live music, theater, museums and galleries — has dropped over the years. This goes for children, too: Arts and music programs in schools are being dismantled in lieu of programs better suited to standardized testing; time outdoors and for novel, unbounded exploration are sacrificed for résumé-building activities.

We believe that awe deprivation has had a hand in a broad societal shift that has been widely observed over the past 50 years: People have become more individualistic, more self-focused, more materialistic and less connected to others. To reverse this trend, we suggest that people insist on experiencing more everyday awe, to actively seek out what gives them goose bumps, be it in looking at trees, night skies, patterns of wind on water or the quotidian nobility of others — the teenage punk who gives up his seat on public transportation, the young child who explores the world in a state of wonder, the person who presses on against all odds.All of us will be better off for it.

(Paul Piff is an assistant professor of psychology and social behavior at the University of California, Irvine. Dacher Keltner is a professor of psychology at the University of California, Berkeley. A version of this op-ed appears in print on May 24, 2015, on Page SR10 of the New York edition with the headline: Why Do We Experience Awe? )

23

Lesson 6 - The Existence of the UniverseYour teacher will assess your work from this half term and check you are making progress

• You will receive a band for

• Knowledge and understanding

• Evaluation and Justification

• And Discussion

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

24

‘science and faith are incompatible’ Discuss

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

25

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……………

26

Measuring progress after GCSE: Level 1 / Level 2: sub-AS level Level 3: if you achieved a C grade at GCSE, you

should be working on and above a level 3 Level 4: if you achieved a B grade at GCSE, you

should be working on and above a level 4 Level 5: if you achieved an A/A*grade at GCSE,

you should be working on a level 5

Making progress in CORE RE ‘science and faith are incompatible’ Discuss