John Templeton Foundation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The John Templeton Foundation was established in 1987 by international money manager Sir John Templeton; it is usually referred to simply as the Templeton Foundation. The mission of the Templeton Foundation, according to its website, is:

to serve as a philanthropic catalyst for scientific discovery on what scientists and philosophers call the 'Big Questions.' Ranging from questions about the laws of nature to the nature of creativity and consciousness, the Foundation’s philanthropic vision is derived from Sir John’s resolute belief that rigorous research and cutting-edge scholarship is at the very heart of new discoveries and human progress.

Each year, the Foundation awards the Templeton Prize to the living individual who best exemplifies "trying various ways for discoveries and breakthroughs to expand human perceptions of divinity and to help in the acceleration of divine creativity." The prize is adjusted to always be slightly higher than the Nobel Prize.

1 Activities
2 Political orientation
3 Relations with the scientific community
4 References
5 External links

[edit] Activities

One of the main activities of the Foundation is the disbursal of prizes; in 2004, for example, John Templeton on behalf of the Foundation presented the makers of the controversial movie The Passion of the Christ with a $50,000 "Epiphany Prize for the Most Inspirational Movie" and writer August Turak with a $100,000 "Power of Purpose" prize; a full list of prizes the Foundation awards yearly can be found on their website^[1].

Individuals associated with the foundation include Paul Davies, Max Tegmark, John D. Barrow, Stephen Post, Martin Seligman, Harold Koenig, Laurence Iannaccone, Nicholas Colangello, and Alexander Astin. MediaTransparency lists grant receiving institutions for 1998 to 2004; the top five are Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences ($23 million), National Institute for Healthcare Research ($8 million), Philadelphia Center for Religion & Science ($4 million), Metanexus Institute on Religion and Science ($4 million), and Science and Spirit Resources, Inc. ($4 million)^[2].

The Foundation also has media presence. It runs its own publisher, Templeton Foundation Press, a newsletter and associated website Science & Theology News and publishes the periodical "In Character: A Journal of Everyday Virtues". It is published three times a year; each issue has a theme such as "thrift" or "purpose".

The "day-to-day" management of the foundation since 1995 is by president John M. Templeton, Jr., M.D., the son of its founder. Templeton, Jr. is an evangelical Christian and the head of Let Freedom Ring, Inc., a group that raises funds for conservative causes^[3].

[edit] Political orientation

A 1997 article in Slate Magazine noted that the Templeton Foundation had given significant financial support to groups, causes and individuals considered conservative, including gifts to Gertrude Himmelfarb, Milton Friedman, Walter E. Williams, Julian Lincoln Simon and Mary Lefkowitz, and referred to John Templeton, Sr., as a "conservative sugar daddy"^[4].

In addition to suggestions that the foundation has a conservative bent, controversy exists over the foundation's support for intelligent design proponents. In 1996 the foundation awarded a prize to an Australian cosmologist who supports intelligent design, in 1999 provided a grant to the Discovery Institute^[5], and has also funded the production of "The Privileged Planet: How Our Place in the Cosmos is Designed for Discovery", a 2004 book supporting intelligent design by Guillermo Gonzalez, a senior fellow at the Discovery Institute ^[6].

In 2005, the foundation disputed suggestions that they have a conservative agenda or they promote intelligent design^[7], saying that they may support individual projects that support intelligent design, but that they do not support the "intelligent design movement."^[8] The foundation has also funded critics of the movement. A New York Times article said the foundation asked intelligent design proponents to submit proposals for actual research and quoted Charles L. Harper Jr., senior vice president at the Templeton Foundation, as saying "They never came in" and that while he was skeptical from the beginning, other foundation officials were initially intrigued and later grew disillusioned. "From the point of view of rigor and intellectual seriousness, the intelligent design people don't come out very well in our world of scientific review," he said.^[9] The Templeton Foundation has since rejected the Discovery Institute's entreaties for more funding, Harper stated. "They're political - that for us is problematic," and that while Discovery has "always claimed to be focused on the science," "what I see is much more focused on public policy, on public persuasion, on educational advocacy and so forth."?"^[10]^[11]

In 2007 in the LA Times Pamela Thompson, Vice President for Communications of the Templeton Foundation wrote "We do not believe that the science underpinning the intelligent-design movement is sound, we do not support research or programs that deny large areas of well-documented scientific knowledge, and the foundation is a nonpolitical entity and does not engage in or support political movements."[1] The same day the Wall Street Journal also included a letter from the same Pamela Thompson making much the same point: "The foundation doesn't support the political movement known as 'Intelligent Design.' This is for three reasons: We don't believe the science underpinning the 'Intelligent Design' movement is sound, we don't support research or programs that deny large areas of well-documented scientific knowledge and the foundatioon is a non-political entity and does not engage in, or suport, political movements." [2]

In February 2007 the Discovery Institute began a campaign to counter the unfavorable statements of Harper and Thompson citing a "report" published on the pro-Intelligent Design wiki, ResearchID.^[12] This campaign quoted clarifications from Charles Harper of the Templeton Foundation denouncing intelligent design and distancing the Templeton Foundation from the intelligent design movement, notably a clarification by Harper that a Wall Street Journal article published "false information" that "mention[ed] the John Templeton Foundation in a way suggesting that the Foundation has been a concerted patron and sponsor of the so-called Intelligent Design ("ID") position,"^[13] ResearchID and Discovery Institute claimed that this was indicative of larger errors and bias: "The media has misrepresented the record of the intelligent design research community."^[14] Critics of intelligent design responded by noting that though Harper appears to have "confirmed that while the first statement about a formal call for applications was false, the real point of the article, that ID advocates don't do very well in terms of actual research and scientific review, remains true and valid" a point the Discovery Institute glosses over.^[15] The Templeton Foundation posted a response to the Discovery Institute's campaign, saying:

In response to errors and misrepresentations stated in the February 28, 2007 ResearchID.com blog post: 1. The John Templeton Foundation has never made a call-for-proposals to the ID Community. 2. The Henry Schaefer grant was from the Origins of Biological Complexity program. Schaefer is a world's leading chemist, and his research has nothing whatsoever to do with ID. 3. Bill Dembski's grant was not for the book 'No Free Lunch.' Dembski was given funds to write another book on Orthodox Theology, which was not on ID, however he has never written the book. From our FAQ... Does the Foundation support I.D.? No. We do not support the political movement known as "Intelligent Design." This is for three reasons 1) we do not believe the science underpinning the "Intelligent Design" movement is sound, 2) we do not support research or programs that deny large areas of well-documented scientific knowledge, and 3) the Foundation is a non-political entity and does not engage in, or support, political movements. It is important to note that in the past we have given grants to scientists who have gone on to identify themselves as members of the Intelligent Design community. We understand that this could be misconstrued by some to suggest that we implicitly support the Intelligent Design movement, but, as outlined above, this was not our intention at the time nor is it today. -- Templeton Foundation^[16]

[edit] Relations with the scientific community

The supportive stance of religious thinkers has led to criticism from some members of the scientific community; Sean M. Carroll a cosmologist and atheist from the University of Chicago wrote, in describing his self-recusal from a conference he discovered was funded by the Foundation, that "the entire purpose of the Templeton Foundation is to blur the line between straightforward science and explicitly religious activity, making it seem like the two enterprises are part of one big undertaking. It's all about appearances." But he also said, "I appreciate that the Templeton Foundation is actually, in its own way, quite pro-science, and is not nearly as objectionable as the anti-scientific crackpots at the Discovery Institute."^[17] In his book The God Delusion, Richard Dawkins (an evolutionary biologist) repeatedly criticizes the Templeton Foundation, referring to the Templeton Prize as "a very large sum of money given...usually to a scientist who is prepared to say something nice about religion."