This is taken from an interview conducted by science journalist John Horgan, with Italian Theoretical Physicist Carlos Rovelli.
The entire interview is quite interesting, but this is the portion that really caught my eye.
Horgan: Are science and religion compatible?
Rovelli: Of course yes: you can be great in solving Maxwell’s equations and pray to God in the evening. But there is an unavoidable clash between science and certain religions, especially some forms of Christianity and Islam, those that pretend to be repositories of “absolute Truths.” The problem is not that scientists think they know everything. It is the opposite: scientists know that there are things we simply do not know, and naturally question those who pretend to know. Many religious people are disturbed by this, and have difficulty in coping with it. The religious person says, “I know that God has created light saying, ‘Fiat Lux.’” The scientist does not believe the story. The religious people feel threatened. And here the clash develops. But not all religions are like that. Many forms of Buddhism, for instance, have no difficulty with the continual critical attitude of science. Monotheistic religions, and in particular Islam and Christianity, are sometimes less intelligent.
I have an idea about the source of the conflict: there is beautiful research by anthropologists in Australia which shows that religious beliefs are often considered a-temporal but in reality change continuously and adapt to new conditions, new knowledge and so on. This was discovered by comparing religious beliefs held by native Australians studied by anthropologists in the thirties and, much later, in the seventies. So, in a natural situation, religious beliefs adapt to the change in man’s culture and knowledge. The problem with Islam and Christianity is that many centuries ago somebody had the idea of writing down beliefs. So now some religious people are stuck with the culture and knowledge of centuries ago. They are fish trapped in a pond of old water.
Just let that marinate in your mind a little bit.
And while doing that also realize that despite being written down that these religions DO indeed evolve when fresher ideas are introduced. However when the community (ie body of water) isolates itself it does indeed continue to view the archaic and outdated ideas that are written in their various religious tomes as, if you will pardon the word, the Gospel.
No wonder those who maintain power by keeping the populace superstitious and clinging to ancient beliefs, argue against education and fear the internet.
You concisely summed it up in your last paragraph and I totally agree. The question is this: Can we Overcome?
ReplyDelete"When the community isolates itself..."
ReplyDeleteBible nuts yank their kids out of public schools, isolating the kids in order to teach them Bible verses at home.
I 'm reading a very interesting book that addresses this topic. "When Did the Bible Become Holy". It seems that the above discussion goes back to the dawn of history. People need to appease the gods and they needed proper places and altars for their burnt offerings. Along came the priests who saw and opportunity and ran with it. As Emile Zola said, "Man kind will not be free until the last stone from the last church falls on the last priest"
ReplyDeleteBesides the "beliefs", religions have an economic and demographic component. The Shakers were economically successful, but celibacy was a deal breaker. The cheapest possible new adherent is a baby (no missionary work necessary) thus successful religions stress control of sex to generate a high birth rate.
ReplyDeleteAnother component of religions is to "sell" a popular point of view. Domination by males is REAL popular.
Religion is an industry. The product being sold is completely intangible, cheap to manufacture and has compelling marketability (you will go to HELL).
Or pond scum...
ReplyDeleteAn isolated pond, full of old water, will soon run out of oxygen. It's happening, be patient. These people have two choices, dispense with the gills and evolve lungs to breathe oxygen, or slowly suffocate.
ReplyDeleteSir......I do believe it's "populace"........
ReplyDeleteWhat an insightful article and the analogy of "Fish trapped in a Pond of Old Water" fits perfectly. He's right about the religions that have "absolute truths". I remember leaning by rote the Baltimore Catechism (Where is God? God is Everywhere", add the RCC rites and commandments, and there's no room for questioning anything. It's brainwashing and guilt.
ReplyDelete