Sean Carroll ´s Physics and Choice vs. Christian Integrity

I was just watching a 2012 debate with Sean Carroll, quite an articulate Physicist. However, he has been messing with Theism-Anti-Theism, and getting things mixed up. He was arguing in 2012 that he represents a naturalistic viewpoint, that churches have lost their moral authority, and that it is up to Science to develop an understanding and a set of answers for how people should live their lives in this world. "We haven´t done that yet," he stated. I just watched a 2017 video of a talk of his, "From the Big Bang to the Meaning of Life," in which he finishes with his big social philosophy that life is about making choices. His thoughts about life´s meaning are that "caring about other people is compatible with the laws of Physics," Physics doesn´t stop us from doing so, and is a choice. He offered an example, and he read a piece from the late Carl Sagan´s wife who wrote that the two of them avoided "illusions" like the afterlife, took care of each other and their family, and that that was "wonderful" in their time in the cosmos. The trivialization of social philosophy, and beyond that spiritual and religious philosophy, in such presentations is disturbing. I´m a Biologist and a nature lover, and so one way or another, keenly aware of the problem of unsustainable modern lifestyles and the need for social and environmental sustainability. However, Carroll certainly has found his niche in presenting the most modern understanding of the laws of Physics, which clearly hold a fascination for many people. He presents the Core Theory of the essential equations that explain day-to-day reality in quantum mechanics, spacetime gravity, other forces, matter, and the Higgs field, refers to the probablities involved, and the fact that there are no values and no judgments. He made an enthusiastic reference to scientist Michael Russell´s statement, "The purpose of life is to hydrogenate carbon dioxide." He had earlier referred to mathematician and philosopher Bertrand Russell´s statement that "cause and effect were not fundamental in Physics." From the point of view of social philosophy, the guy is using Physics terminology to achieve some kind of conceptual state of cleansing and surrender. It´s at that concluding point that he asserts the importance of caring for others, and choosing to do so in the limited lifespan of a human being. Now, The Tao of Physics was written years ago by physicist Fritjof Capra, who perhaps didn´t make such a direct statement about the value of caring for others. Capra did compare Quantum Physics and its insights to Eastern Religions. He also went on to explore a range of thinking in a range of disciplines, exploring at least the question of orthodoxy and alternatives to orthodoxy. His own focus became that of ecological literacy and General Systems Theory. Carroll made the point in 2017 that some bad decisions had been made, and appeared to be referring to the election of the new President of the US. If that referred to the election of Donald Trump, a profiteering corporate executive, the issue of choices and wisdom in making those choices raises important questions. While Physics doesn´t making "caring for others" incompatible with the laws of Physics, does Scientism and excessive focus on Physics to the neglect of other disciplines? Apparently so. Stanley Jaki was a physicist and historian of Religion, who studied the cognitive predicates of Science in History. Moreover, even before Newton´s great scientific breakthrough, George Fox had already made his non-University breakthrough of high integrity Christianity. He challenged social injustice, healed spiritually, and led his denomination to spread while several generations later something remarkable happened. His followers founded pioneering Anti-Slavery Societies and launched ecumenical movements to end slavery. The power and clarity of such Christian integrity maintains its clarity as leaders in crucial issues of modern sustainability include Al Gore and FD and Eleanor Roosevelt´s legacy in the UN and its IPCC, along with UNEP and other agencies.