Something Anything
Last month I wrote about the division in society between science and religion. Actually religious fundamentalists are the ones fighting against science, because fundamentalists cannot accept any new knowledge which contradictions the fundamental religious text. This month I will look at how religion and science can complement each other.
Religions are not made up exclusively of fundamentalists. There are religious scholars who spend their lives trying to interpret the religious texts in the light of knowledge learned since the time the text was written. Historical, linguistic and scientific knowledge sheds light on the religious text, and what what it was meant to portray. Secular history has recorded events which were also recorded in religious texts. Different translations of the religious texts may have subtle differences in understanding how a text is interpreted. Scientific knowledge based on natural observations has given us deeper insight into the reality and the mythology of the religious text.
Religion is flawed, but it does serve a purpose. Religion has given society a moral center for thousands of years. Religion has calmed man since man has become self aware. Self awareness gave man the need to inquire into his own destiny and purpose. The leaders of the tribes learned man's need of a purpose was also a control mechanism. Man's purpose soon became honoring the gods by following the laws of the tribe.
At first man told fables explaining why one should work for the common good. But some men would disregard the fables and do as they pleased. Finding that real life didn't always portray the fables people would begin to laugh at the fables and society would fall into disarray. Leaders typically want order and discipline. Lack of order and discipline in the wilds could be the difference between life and death. No doubt the leaders would begin to invoke gods as a threat to the tribe. If you don't build a shelter the god of rain will get you wet. If you don't prepare for war, the god of war will smite you. If you don't hunt for food the god of hunger will starve you.
Soon the fables and gods were merged to become mythological stories having a much stronger impact on the tribe. As people do, they elaborate stories each time trying to make the story more and more powerful in order to keep control over the tribe. The logical conclusion of this evolution is one powerful God who can destroy the world because he created it. Of course the leader of the tribe has the communication channel to the gods and can be called upon whenever someone disobeys.
Science is flawed as well. It evolved from constantly observing nature. Observing nature provides knowledge which is used to make life easier. This automatically puts science at odds with the religious leader trying to maintain control by invoking the gods. Science can answer some questions, but many questions are left unanswered. Science's weakness is its uncertainty in social and political issues. Science can not tell you how you should behave unless the final goal is completely understood. In most cases the final goal is always evolving as we gain insight. As time goes on some leaders found it advantageous to invoke science, others invoked religion and others rely on brute force and animal instinct.
In the long run, an adaptable religion is necessary to cope with the massive amount of information being discovered every day. An adaptable religion has very little authority because its current stance is continually shifting. Talk about waffling. Imagine a religion suggesting abortion is wonderful at one time, and based on scientific inquiry it changes its stance a year or two later. Another few years later the religion makes another recommendation based on another scientific investigation. Each inquiry changes the question and pursues another perspective. The first study could ask: Who should control the abortion decision, the doctor or the patient? The next question may ask, what are the psychological effects on women who have had abortions? Another question could be: How do rape victims respond when denied an abortion? As you can see, the line of questioning may provide us with different suggestions as a function of time and study. It will also result in a very broad suggestion based on scientific study and a best outcome for overall society although the path may suggest many different suggestions along the way.
The reality of the situation is religion must provide a moral authority to govern the society while scientists feed results of various investigations to the religious. The religious have the duty to take the results of the scientific inquiry and interpret the results with religious teachings and develop a long lasting moral authority and ideal for humans to strive to attain. Unfortunately the religious community is divided in interpretation of the evidence. When the religious leaders differ vastly on the interpretation of the evidence the hope for human cooperation is left at the wayside.
In conclusion I would suggest all religious leaders should come to a common ground. Bits and pieces of these many different religions being unified would pull together a common thread of universal human religious experience. This unification would stress the strengths of religion and de-emphasize the pieces out in the fringe of the same experience. With an open mind and human understanding religious truth may expose a piece of itself.
Religious truth does not end there. Once religion is unified it can begin to deal with the flood of information from the scientific inquiry. If this would ever happen mankind would truly have a moral authority based on the enlightenment of the elders.
Note: Beware the humanness of all humans, including those who proclaim moral authority!
Michael Forbush3-17-99
More Life the Universe and Everything
