Metaphysics, Theology, and Ethics: A Response to Deacon and Cashman’s “Steps to a Metaphysics of Incompleteness
Response or Comment
Taylor & Francis
I am glad that Terrence Deacon and Ty Caslunan wrote their very thought-provoking essay "Steps to a Metaphysics of Incompleteness." I remember a conversation with Deacon in 2010 where he described some of these ideas to me and a few other people, and I asked if he had shared these ideas widely and he said no. He said they were not ready to share, so he wasn't going to. But now he has, and for that 1 am appreciative. It is a courageous thing to present independent thinking to the world, because people will almost certainly disagree. But without some disagreement over what we already do or do not know, we can never learn anything new. And in our plain ignorance about so much, new ideas are our only hope for better understanding our universe. With that said, now I have to start disagreeing. First I will swnmarize the paper and where I am confused or disagree, and second I will get into speculative extensions of the paper, and where I see some of its fascinating ramifications.
Green, B. P. (2016). Metaphysics, Theology, and Ethics: A Response to Deacon and Cashman’s “Steps to a Metaphysics of Incompleteness.” Theology and Science, 14(4), 430–440. https://doi.org/10.1080/14746700.2016.1231978