The Templeton Prize - What is the Point?

[Wowbagger]

Someone recently sent me this link, asking what I thought:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article3540989.ece

I hardly knew anything about the Templeton Prize, but I immediately suspected it was all about nothing. Am I wrong that regard?

Has anything useful ever come out of any discoveries that won Templeton prizes? Any insights into medical research? Or practical utilities? Has any further precision in knowledge of our Universe increased with any of the award winners, at least?

If not, then what is the point? Increase faith in god? Can't that be done without distorting the process of science?

A revealing quote from the latest winner. Michael Heller:
Science is but a collective effort of the human mind to read the mind of God from question marks out of which we and the world around us seem to be made. (I thought Science is a collective of effort to understand the Universe, no matter god exists or not, using the disciplines of empirical investigation.)


According to Wikipedia:
The monetary value of the prize (795,000 GBP or approx. 1.4 million US dollars in 2006) is adjusted so that it exceeds that of the Nobel Prizes. The prize is, as of 2006, the largest single annual financial prize award given to an individual for intellectual merit.


Is the amount of money really important? Is that the real motivation of the winners?

I am posting this under Religion, because I would like to encourage religious folks to respond, not just the usual agnostic/atheist bunch that usually hangs around this Forum.

For the religious: What is the point of the Templeton Prize, as you see it?

For the non-religious: What insights can you tell us about Templeton's history and goals?

[Kopji]

They provide grants to help create the fine clothes that the Emperor wears. (You remember the story - the wonderful clothes that everyone can see except for the dull, inept and stupid.)

In their own words, here:
http://www.templeton.org/submitting_a_proposal/

I suppose you could call this a non religious comment from the usual bunch. :D

[Jekyll]

Is the amount of money really important? Is that the real motivation of the winners?


The amount of money isn't chosen to attract winners. It's to try and fake legitimacy. The point of a genuine award like a Nobel prize or a Fields medal isn't in the cash sum associated with it, but that everyone agrees that it's worth having and represents a true achievement.

By setting the cash prize to be greater than that of the Nobel prize, the Templeton Foundation can, outside the scientific community, point to it as a source of legitimacy.

This is how they get these articles written in the times.

[ceo_esq]

Has anything useful ever come out of any discoveries that won Templeton prizes? Any insights into medical research? Or practical utilities? Has any further precision in knowledge of our Universe increased with any of the award winners, at least?

If not, then what is the point? Increase faith in god? Can't that be done without distorting the process of science?

The prize doesn't seems to be a scientific one as such, but one awarded more for work in metaphysics (with perhaps a preference for the intersection of science - less applied than theoretical - and metaphysics). Certainly the list of prizewinners includes for the most part serious and even pre-eminent scholars in the natural sciences, philosophy and history of science, and so forth. The list of present and former judges also includes some luminaries in various scientific and other fields.

There seems to be little reason to believe that the award "distorts the process of science".

[Wowbagger]

There seems to be little reason to believe that the award "distorts the process of science". Read the quote I mentioned in the OP. There handing out cash to people who seriously think their "science" could prove the existence of God.

They provide grants to help create the fine clothes that the Emperor wears.
Or at least attempt to. That prayer study thing didn't do them any favors.

The amount of money isn't chosen to attract winners. It's to try and fake legitimacy. That could be it.

[Fronzel]

Didn't Freeman Dyson win one?

[Wowbagger]

Didn't Freeman Dyson win one?Ah, it seems so!

But, oddly for "Progress in Religion", not any of his science work. Hmm...

[The skepTick]

What's the point? How about to buy science? Stipulations in the Templeton prize are that it is always to be greater than the Nobel prize. Also, look at the past 8 winners. Most of them are from academia (a lot of physicists). Compare that to who won before - mostly philosophers or believers straight from the church.

The American Association of Scientists (AAS) has a program called the Dialog on Science, Ethics, and Religion (http://www.aaas.org/spp/dser/). This was started by the Templeton fund offering AAS a large sum of money...and the AAS accepted and almost sold their soul, so to speak. They've somehow managed to salvage the program and maintain a little dignity, although, according to Bob Park, it came perilously close to succumbing. Again, this is another example of Templeton buying science.

[Wowbagger]

What's the point? How about to buy science? Silly Templetons, science can not be bought! At least not for very long.

I was just re-reading bits of The God Delusion. I had forgotten how often Richard Dawkins jabs at them, for that very thing.

The American Association of Scientists (AAS) has a program called the Dialog on Science, Ethics, and Religion (http://www.aaas.org/spp/dser/). This was started by the Templeton fund offering AAS a large sum of money...and the AAS accepted and almost sold their soul, so to speak. They've somehow managed to salvage the program and maintain a little dignity, although, according to Bob Park, it came perilously close to succumbing. Again, this is another example of Templeton buying science. Sounds oddly like parasitic behavior. Latch onto a host, and transform it to do your bidding.

Templeton is taking a beating. Any defenders wish to step up to the plate?