News Feeds

As I note in my new review of Francis Collins’s new book, The Road to Wisdom: On Truth, Science, Faith, and Trust, he’s a very good scientist and science administrator, but also a pious evangelical Christian (remember the frozen waterfalls that brought him to Jesus?).  Collins had previously written a book arguing that science and Christianity were not only compatible, but complementary ways of finding the truth, but now he’s produced another. As I say in my review of the new book in Quillette (click on screenshot below, or find my review archived here):

While much of the Road to Wisdom reprises the arguments of the earlier book, this new one takes things a bit further. Collins is deeply concerned about the divisions in American society highlighted by the last presidential election, by people’s inability to have constructive discussions with their opponents, and by our pervasive addiction to social media and its “fake news”; and he believes that accepting a harmony between religion and science will yield the wisdom that can mend America.

As the author of Faith Versus Fact: Why Science and Religion are Incompatible, I wouldn’t be expected to laud Collins’s thesis, and I didn’t.  You can read the review for yourself, but I spend a lot of time criticizing Collins’s claim that science combined with religion is the best way to find the “truths”to repair the deep divisions in America’s polity. Even if those divisions—Collins largely means Republicans vs. Democrats—can be repaired, saying that the way forward is combine the “truths” of science and religion is a deeply misguided claim.

I won’t go into details, but of course religion is simply not a way to discover truth, especially since Collins’s definition of “truth” is basically “facts about the world on which everyone agrees”: in other words, empirical truth. Religion can’t find such truths, as it lacks the methodology.  Note that Collins does not espouse Gould’s “Non-Overlapping Magisteria” claim that science and religion are compatible because they deal with completely different issues, with science alone getting the ambit of empirical truth. Gould’s claim, described in his 1999 book Rocks of Ages, was also misguided, and you can read my old TLS critique of it here.) No, Collins asserts that religion can find empirical truths. Sadly, he gives no examples where religion can beat science–just a bunch of questions that religion can supposedly answer (e.g., “How should I live my life?”).

I’ll give one more quote from my review:

What are the truths that religion can produce but science can’t? Collins’s list is unconvincing. It includes the “fact” of Jesus’s resurrection and the author’s unshakable belief that “Jesus died for me and was then literally raised from the dead.” In support of this claim, Collins cites N.T. Wright’s The Resurrection of the Son of God as compelling evidence for the Resurrection, which Collins claims is “historically well documented.” But when I worked my way through the entirety of Wright’s 817-page behemoth, I found that the “historical documentation” consists solely of what’s in the New Testament, tricked out with some rationalisation and exegesis. Neither Collins nor Wright provide independent, extra-Biblical evidence for the crucifixion and resurrection, much less for the Biblical assertion that upon Jesus’s death the Temple split in twain and many dead saints left their tombs and walked about Jerusalem like zombies. Absent solid evidence for these claims, they are little more than wishful thinking.

Other “truths” that one finds in religion are “moral truths”: the confusing set of rules that Collins labels the “Moral Law.” To him, the fact that our species even has morality constitutes further evidence for God, for Collins sees no way that either evolution or secular rationality could yield a codified ethics. That claim is belied by the long tradition of secular ethics developed by people like Baruch Spinoza, Peter Singer, Immanuel Kant, and John Rawls. While many faiths and societies aspire to common goals like “love, beauty, goodness, freedom, faith, and family,” this does not suggest the existence of a supernatural being.

Click below (or here):

Although it seems obvious to me that religion and science are incompatible insofar as both make empirical claims (granted, some of faith’s claims are hard to test), it’s not obvious to the many Americans who blithely get their vaccinations but then head to Church and recite the “truths” of the Nicene Creed. Sam Harris pointed this out in a piece he wrote opposing Collins’s appointment as NIH director:

It is widely claimed that there can be no conflict, in principle, between science and religion because many scientists are themselves “religious,” and some even believe in the God of Abraham and in the truth of ancient miracles. Even religious extremists value some of the products of science—antibiotics, computers, bombs, etc.—and these seeds of inquisitiveness, we are told, can be patiently nurtured in a way that offers no insult to religious faith.

This prayer of reconciliation goes by many names and now has many advocates. But it is based on a fallacy. The fact that some scientists do not detect any problem with religious faith merely proves that a juxtaposition of good ideas/methods and bad ones is possible. Is there a conflict between marriage and infidelity? The two regularly coincide. The fact that intellectual honesty can be confined to a ghetto—in a single brain, in an institution, in a culture—does not mean that there isn’t a perfect contradiction between reason and faith, or between the worldview of science taken as a whole and those advanced by the world’s “great,” and greatly discrepant, religions.

While I wouldn’t have opposed Collins’s appointment on the basis of his faith, I would have if he had shown any signs that his faith would affect his science. As it turned out, it didn’t: Collins left his religion at the door of the NIH.  But he continues to proselytize for both Christianity as the “true” faith and for a perfect harmony between science and religion.

In a patronizing New Yorker article (is that redundant?) about Collins and his book that I just discovered, I was sad to see another pal soften his views about Collins, science, and faith:

Steven Pinker, the Harvard psychologist who fiercely criticized Collins’s nomination on account of his “primitive, shamanistic, superstitious” religious views, told me in an e-mail that he had changed his mind about Collins, for two reasons. “One is the sheer competence and skill with which he’s directed the Institutes, blending scientific judgment with political acumen,” Pinker wrote. “The other is a newly appreciated imperative, in an age of increasing political polarization, toward making institutions of science trustworthy to a broad swath of the public, of diverse political orientations.” In a way, I thought, Pinker was saying that representation matters: science has an audience, and the right speaker can persuade all of that audience to listen. “A spokesperson for science who is not branded as a left-wing partisan is an asset for the wider acceptance of science across the political spectrum,” Pinker said. But Collins is more than a spokesperson for science. He is also a kind of representative, within the scientific community, of American communities that his peers sometimes fail to reach.

Pinker’s first point is right, and, as I said, I wouldn’t—and didn’t—oppose Collins’s nomination as NIH director.But the author then interprets Pinker as making the “Little People” argument: science will be accepted more broadly if scientists accept religion, even if those scientists don’t practice it. In other words, we have to avoid criticizing superstition if America is to fully embrace science.

But while there’s no need for scientists to bang on about religion when we’re teaching about or promoting science, no scientist should ever approve of a belief in unevidenced superstition, or of any system of such supterstition.  Yet that’s exactly what Collins does in his book, and it’s why the book is misguided, flatly wrong about accommodationism, and unenlightening.

New Scientist has used freedom of information laws to obtain the ChatGPT records of Peter Kyle, the UK's technology secretary, in what is believed to be a world-first use of such legislation

If you think about the human hand as a work of engineering, it is absolutely incredible. The level of fine motor control is extreme. It is responsive and precise. It has robust sensory feedback. It combines both rigid and soft components, so that it is able to grip and lift heavy objects and also cradle and manipulate soft or delicate objects. Trying to replicate this functionality with modern robotics have been challenging, to say the least. But engineers are making steady incremental progress.

I like to check it on how the technology is developing, especially when there appears to be a significant advance. There are two basic applications for robotic hands – for robots and for prosthetics for people who have lost their hand to disease or injury. For the latter we need not only advances in the robotics of the hand itself, but also in the brain-machine interface that controls the hand. Over the years we have seen improvements in this control, using implanted brain electrodes, scalp surface electrodes, and muscle electrodes.

We have also seen the incorporation of sensory feedback, which greatly enhances control. Without this feedback, users have to look at the limb they are trying to control. With sensory feedback, they don’t have to look at it, overall control is enhanced, and the robotic limb feels much more natural. Another recent addition to this technology has been the incorporation of AI, to enhance the learning of the system during training. The software that translates the electrical signals from the user into desired robotic movements is much faster and more accurate than without AI algorithms.

A team at Johns Hopkins is trying to take the robotic hand to the next level – A natural biomimetic prosthetic hand with neuromorphic tactile sensing for precise and compliant grasping. They are specifically trying to mimic a human hand, which is a good approach. Why second-guess millions of years of evolutionary tinkering? They call their system a “hybrid” robotic hand because it incorporates both rigid and soft components. Robotic hands with rigid parts can be strong, but have difficulty handling soft or delicate objects. Hands made of soft parts are good for soft objects, but tend to be weak. The hybrid approach makes sense, and mimics a human hand with internal bones covered in muscles and then soft skin. 

The other advance was to incorporate three independent layers of sensation. This also more closely mimics a human hand, which has both superficial and deep sensory receptors. This is necessary to distinguish what kind of object is being held, and to detect things like the object slipping in the grip. In humans, for example, one of the symptoms of carpal tunnel syndrome, which can impair sensation to the first four fingers of the hands, is that people will drop objects they are holding. With diminished sensory feedback, they don’t maintain the muscle tone necessary to maintain their grip on the object.

Similarly, prosthetics benefit from sensory feedback to control how much pressure to apply to a held object. They have to grip tightly enough to keep it from slipping, but not so tight that they crush or break the object. This means that the robotic limb needs to be able to detect the weight and firmness of the object it is holding. Having different layers of sensation allows for this. The superficial layer detects touch, while the progressively deeper layers will be activated with increasing grip strength. AI is also used to help interpret these signals, which in turn stimulate the users nerves to provide them with natural-feeling sensory feedback.

They report:

“Our innovative design capitalizes on the strengths of both soft and rigid robots, enabling the hybrid robotic hand to compliantly grasp numerous everyday objects of varying surface textures, weight, and compliance while differentiating them with 99.69% average classification accuracy. The hybrid robotic hand with multilayered tactile sensing achieved 98.38% average classification accuracy in a texture discrimination task, surpassing soft robotic and rigid prosthetic fingers. Controlled via electromyography, our transformative prosthetic hand allows individuals with upper-limb loss to grasp compliant objects with precise surface texture detection.”

Moving forward they plan to increase the number of sensory layers and to tweak the hybrid structure of soft and rigid components to more closely mimic a human hand. They also plan to incorporate more industrial-grade materials. The goal is to create a robotic prosthetic hand that can mimic the versatility and dexterity of a human hand, or at least come as close as possible.

Combined with advances in brain-machine interface technology and AI control, robotic prosthetic limb technology is rapidly progressing. It’s pretty exciting to watch.

The post Hybrid Bionic Hand first appeared on NeuroLogica Blog.

A mission to survey the results of a deliberate crash between an asteroid and a NASA spacecraft has taken stunning images of Mars and its moon Deimos

Located on a mountaintop in Chile, the nearly complete Vera C. Rubin Observatory will capture the Universe in incredible detail. This week saw another huge step for the observatory with the installation of the car sized - yes car sized - LSST camera onto the Simonyi Survey Telescope. The camera is the largest ever built, weighing in at over 3,000 kilograms with an impressive 3,200 megapixels. Coupled to the 8.4 metre optics of the Rubin will allow it to capture everything that happens in the southern sky, night after night.

To reduce the growing risk of intense wildfires, California is cutting and burning the areas that fuel them – but these efforts may be moving too slowly

On March 11, the California skyline was once again treated to the launch of the SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket from the Vandenberg Space Force Base. It carried two missions into space; SPHEREx to study the origins of the Universe and the molecular clouds of the Milky Way and four other satellites making up PUNCH. This latter mission is tasked with exploring how the Sun’s outer atmosphere causes the solar wind.

Electrolysis has been a mainstay of crewed mission designs for the outer solar system for decades. It is the most commonly used methodology to split oxygen from water, creating a necessary gas from a necessary liquid. However, electrolysis systems are bulky and power-intensive, so NASA has decided to look into alternative solutions. They supported a company called Precision Combustion, Inc (PCI) via their Institutes for Advanced Concepts (NIAC) grant to work on a system of thermo-photo-catalytic conversion that could dramatically outperform existing electrolysis reactors.

NASA’s Perseverance rover found large crystals of quartz with a high purity on Mars, which probably had to have formed in the presence of hot water

When Islamic Medicine Kills the Ayatollah!

The post Islamic Medicine and the Biopolitics of Antiscience in Iran first appeared on Science-Based Medicine.

Astronomers using the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) have completed a survey of galaxies that reveals their rotation directions with unprecedented clarity. Contrary to expectations that galaxy rotations would be randomly distributed, they discovered a surprising pattern, that most galaxies appear to rotate in a similar direction! One hypothesis suggests the universe itself might have an overall rotation, researchers believe a more plausible explanation though is that Earth's motion through space creates an observational bias, making galaxies rotating in certain directions more detectable than others.

If you're a regular visitor to Universe Today, you've probably noticed that the website looks dramatically different. Simpler, cleaner, without all those pesky intrusive ads. We're in a new era, now. Here's what happened, why I decided to remove the ads from the site, and what you can expect going forward.

Up to 90% of abdominal surgeries result in adhesions -- abnormal scarring that ties together organs and tissues. A gel has now been shown to prevented adhesions in mice and pigs.

Scientists identify a new way to detect life in outer space with currently existing telescopes. The method hinges on worlds that look nothing like Earth, and gases rarely considered in the search for extraterrestrials.

Researchers elucidate the complex physical mechanisms and fluid dynamics involved in a handclap, with potential applications in bioacoustics and personal identification, whereby a handclap could be used to identify someone.

Researchers have published a new study that dives deep into nickel-based cathodes, one of the two electrodes that facilitate energy storage in batteries.

Scientists have developed an approach that combines rehabilitation robotics with spinal cord stimulation to restore movement in people with spinal cord injuries. The technology enhances rehabilitation and enables activities like cycling and walking outdoors.

Hydrocortisone and testosterone are just two of 13 drugs and supplements that could lessen the impact of genes that accelerate brain ageing

Noughts and crosses, or tic-tac-toe, is a simple game – but twist the rules and you can really spice it up, says Peter Rowlett

The odds are stacked against an all-female robotics team in Rule Breakers, a fantastic film about teaching girls in Afghanistan