It has always been a delicate territory to tread — the parallels between science and religion. Besides, the whole idea of such a ‘bond,’ albeit not all-encompassing, in terms of precept and also percept, rubs people the wrong way on either side of the ‘barrier.’
Scientists, for obvious reasons, dislike the orientation of their work being guided by dogma — not inquiry, or data. Theologians, likewise, fear that attempts to connect religion to empirical study of the world would knock ‘off-balance’ the essence of faith itself. Result: a truly palpable stalemate in the all-too-familiar ‘battle royal’ to link the two great fields of study, or knowledge, has existed and flourished for ages.
Not that science hasn’t seriously investigated the imponderable, or immaterial, that animates the world. It certainly has, through the reading of experimental evidence, just as much as religion, which is explored for knowledge about the intangibles — through the study of the Scriptures. In other words, the inference is comprehensible, because, in either meadow, the frenzied excitement of enlightenment is essentially impossible to tell apart. It is, quite simply, identical.
Things are a-changin’ somewhat today — thanks to a new faith that has acquired hundreds of converts on either side of the spectrum. In simple terms, it is a celestial form of enlightenment, based on a straightforward principle. It seeks out, in place of the unity of god, minimalism of explanation. In place of a central doctrine, it rests on the fabrication of theory through empirical data. Ultimately, it may, as a law of nature, develop its own inherent set of guidelines and provide the mechanism to ‘remove’ them too.
It has a name—one that is fascinatingly novel — sci/religion, as Corey S Powell, the noted American science writer, who’s a member of the editorial board of American Scientist, editor-in-chief, Discover, and Aeon Magazine, puts it in his landmark, as also provocative, book, God in the Equation [Free Press], first published twenty+ years ago. Not just a tome, but a dazzling standard that demystifies the long-time conflict between science and religion, Powell’s brilliant synthesis brings home a new fact. The ‘clash’ has never existed; it is no more than just a myth.
There’s more to Powell’s articulation than what meets the mind. The psi, in sci/religion, represents not only quantum theory, but also the fundamental uncertainty of measurement. Besides, the idea, says Powell, blends elements of the experimental and the mystical and gives credence to a statistical blur of potential positions—positions that may, otherwise, be forbidden according to the classical laws of physics, or even common sense.
Powell’s observant work contends a new relationship between scientists and ecclesiastics, or priests, doubtless. It identifies, for the first time, Albert Einstein as the supreme mystic of the sci/religion revolution. For one simple reason. The founder and greatest prophet of sci/religion, avers Powell, had no qualms about finding common ground between the material and the mystical. Yes, not for a famous wisecrack did Einstein wax lyrical, “God does not play dice.” Einstein recognised the quest for truth as an essentially spiritual journey. In his own words, “Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe — a spirit vastly superior to that of man.”
Einstein, also explicitly and implicitly, preached the doctrines of unity, simplicity, and universality — the guiding lights of sci/religion. Though only a handful of his followers, to quote Powell, speak as openly as he did on ‘divinity,’ their actions give them away. To highlight a paradigm: just look at the beliefs that motivate their experiments, equations, papers, and articles. They worship, as Powell explains so convincingly, in the Church of Einstein.
“Sci/religion,” says Powell, “doesn’t need to make its case solely by tearing down the ancient faiths.” He avers that it offers a positively appealing, alternative way to look at the world — a religion of rational hope. Sci/religion, he adds, is a human faith, prone to inevitable distortions and misinterpretations—like any other field of human enterprise. But, unlike old-time religion, Powell argues, sci/religion has mounds of evidence that show its assumptions are true. Interestingly, he admits — and, to his credit — that sci/religion, thanks to the doctrine of falsification through observation, can never quite state with certainty that all given physical laws apply in all places, at all times.
To quote Powell, “As sci/religion grows ever more generous in scope, old-time religion is struggling to find its place in the new order. But, really, this process of readjustment has been going on for centuries. In the fifth century CE, Saint Augustine already recognised the need to disentangle the biblical account of creation from physical theories of the world, urging that the evidence of the senses should take precedence whenever possible. The Jewish philosopher Moses Maimonides argued that reason should guide our study of the world unless it seemed to contradict the Bible’s most fundamental doctrines. Spinoza established the whole framework of cosmic religion in the seventeenth century by identifying God as an unchanging entity that cannot be separated from natural law. In the past century, the Catholic Church has steadily retreated from both cosmology and evolutionary biology. Even biblical literalists who think the world is 6,000 years old feel compelled to use the arguments and evidence of science in a vain attempt to protect the old faith against the onslaught of the new.”
He adds, “All the same, many people remain convinced that science is amoral or even immoral. Large parts of the world are fiercely devoted to old-time religions. As [Joel] Primack warned, the Temple of Einstein might produce the most glorious picture of the universe ever conceived by humans, and yet fail to find its congregation. ‘How well our cosmology is interpreted in a language meaningful to ordinary people will determine how well its elemental stories are understood, which may in turn affect how positive the consequences for society turn out to be. There is a moral responsibility involved in tampering with the underpinnings of reality.’ That responsibility includes embracing the spiritual.”
He expands, “Einstein foresaw that traditional religions will have to abandon the idea of a personal God and articulate a new moral philosophy. ‘After religious teachers accomplish the refining process indicated they will surely recognise with joy that true religion has been ennobled and made more profound by scientific knowledge.’ But the success of sci/religion depends even more on its practitioners jettisoning their reticence and speaking openly about the deep mystical satisfaction their work delivers.”
He concludes, “The 1930 manifesto that Einstein wrote for The New York Times rings truer than ever today: ‘Those whose acquaintance with scientific research is derived chiefly from its practical results easily develop a completely false notion of the mentality of the men who, surrounded by a sceptical world, have shown the way to kindred spirits scattered wide through the world and the centuries. Only one who has devoted his life to similar ends can have a vivid realisation of what has inspired these men and given them the strength to remain true to their purpose in spite of countless failures.’ It is cosmic religious feeling that gives a man such strength. A contemporary has said, not unjustly, that in this materialistic age of ours the serious scientific workers are the only profoundly religious people.’ It is time for the sci/religious faithful to step up to the pulpit and be heard.’”
Powell examines another facet of sci/religion too: of how it could help confront the problem of human aggression. The new faith, he analyses, is rooted in curiosity and examination. It can, he further explains, grab control of the old human conquering spirit — a relic of our survival instinct — and, redirect it from physical acquisition to intellectual exploration. In his words, “Not long ago, adventurers set out to conquer ostensibly savage lands and convert the native populations. Today, we reach out with our minds to touch the edge of the Universe, and the beginning of Time.”
Powell is convinced that the sci/religious faith will expand — albeit this may seem too far-fetched for most thinkers—not only to provide a new theory of consciousness, but also extend a definitive cosmic connection to it. Consciousness, according to Powell, is a philosophical position — not a testable theory. However, it’s one possibility, he maintains, that could, perhaps, give sci/religion something resembling a model of the soul—a sense that our individual consciousness is linked to universal responsiveness.
To highlight the point, Powell quotes Einstein, who ‘prophesied’ that traditional religions would have to abandon the idea of a personal god and articulate a new moral philosophy. Why? Because, the success of sci/religion depends heavily on its practitioners jettisoning their reticence and speaking openly about the deep mystical satisfaction their work delivers. Or, as Powell aptly elaborates, “The material success of science — glitzy consumer electronics, sophisticated new medical treatments — will not make a case for them.”
— First published in Madras Courier
