« How writing a book rewrote me | Main | Mantra meditation: does God make it better? »

November 05, 2005


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Two other ways of looking at this discussion of science and spirituality. If you look at the history of science you will find that the scientists of any given day felt they had all the pieces of information necessary to justify making statements as to what was true from a scientific point of view. History also shows that they frequently didn't have all the pieces of information they needed and later future scientists discovered that this "scientific truth" wasn't necessarily so. So, these scientists made new declarations of truth.

It makes good sense to stop treating science like a religion to avoid having a later crisis of faith with it. Just because something cannot be proven today, it doesn't mean it isn't true. We may not have the ability, yet, to prove it or disprove it. Science risks fundamentalism when it ignores its own history.

The scientific method is a marvelous tool. It can even be used to prove to oneself the reality of a spiritual experience. What people forget is that replication of a given experiment depends up on all conditions being the same as the original experiment. Some experiments aren't too fussy about the conditions being exactly alike. Others require extreme precision and everything must be almost exactly the same as the first time or it just won't work. A spiritual experience happens to a unique individual at a time when he or she has a unique level of understanding combined with certain physical, emotional and mental states and environments. It would be extremely difficult--almost impossible--to come up with the exact same conditions again--even for the same person. Because he or she has been changed by the experience. Therefore the conditions can no longer be the same. However, this individual can use the methods of science to set up new "experiments" to have similar experiences with different results based on conditions and questions he or she now has. Others can set up their own "experiments" with their uniques conditions and questions and get something similar but from a different point of view.

One of the dangers of both science and religion/spirituality comes from accepting the results of someone else's experiment as the only truth. Truth isn't limited. Our perceptions of it, when we're functioning as humans, is. Truth doesn't depend upon a vote--the majority doesn't get to decide what Truth is. But people who are unable to experiment on their own with any kind of precision, will be limited in their perceptions and understandings. And they will think they can vote on the nature of truth. Our country was designed to prevent this from happening, to give everyone the opportunity to determine for himself or herself the nature of truth. This, not these momentary glimpses of truth we call science and religion, is what we need to protect.

I agree with Marikos when he says"It makes good sense to stop treating science like a religion to avoid having a later crisis of faith with it".Science is a tool, not the end. Science is essentially lying within the purview of human perception, and no one can deny that all is not within human perception.Whether science can deduce accurate conclusions about non-perceptible is debatable.
One word regarding the debate of evolution vs intelligent design. I think there is a possibility that intelligent design could incorporate the evolution itself. For example,such a design is possible with our modern machine- the computer. Think of a design which is programmed to include evolution of its characters with time.
But this whole concept of evolution is linked with time. And my personal belief is that most of the truth associated with creation is beyond time and space. This would be a realm where this debate just loses its meaning.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)


  • Welcome to the Church of the Churchless. If this is your first visit, click on "About this site--start here" in the Categories section below.
  • HinesSight
    Visit my other weblog, HinesSight, for a broader view of what's happening in the world of your Church unpastor, his wife, and dog.
  • BrianHines.com
    Take a look at my web site, which contains information about a subject of great interest to me: me.
  • Twitter with me
    Join Twitter and follow my tweets about whatever.
  • I Hate Church of the Churchless
    Can't stand this blog? Believe the guy behind it is an idiot? Rant away on our anti-site.