Saturday, March 29, 2014

KFC pt 2: How Science became an Enemy of Faith

Will knowledge solve everything?

Proverbs 1:5 (ESV) #verseOfReflection
Let the wise hear and increase in learning,
and the one who understands obtain guidance


In our last entry we discussed episode 2 in the relaunch of Cosmos originally presented by Carl Sagan. On more than one occasion I've mentioned this conflict between science and religion, faith and reason, theology and all other -ologies supported by scientific evidence, philosophy, logic, etc. Today, we get down to the root of the problem of how this potentially came to be. Namely, we look at where certain words come from, their meanings, and how this may have influenced the current debate (which is really almost as old as human knowledge itself). In order to do this we'll make use of etymology or the study of the origin of words. I'd like to suggest we're looking at the root of the words. In all actuality we're just seeing where they come from and the original meanings. Without further adieu, here are some thoughts on episode 3, "When Knowledge Conquered Fear".

Knowledge vs. Fear
This is the moment we've all been waiting for. I couldn't just not give thoughts on episode 2, but episode 3 is where the nitty gritty comes to my front door step. And by that, I mean religion Christianity's front door (and possibly other religions/faiths). Allow me to present my case as to why. First, the title of episode 3, "When Knowledge Conquered Fear" suggests there's a particular fear being quelched here. Again it is reiterated during the show: "No note to explain where we come from, who we are, how our universe came to be..." Wait a minute, say what now?! No note...not a single one?


Hmm...but you know what, given the time period he's talking about (well before writing came into play), he's right. We humans had to "figure [it] out ourselves" using our intelligence or what is termed as pattern recognition. There was a knowledge that was gained from this, which at times seemed to attribute "special powers"; not in the sense of being a superhero per se, but close. This will help to continue in building on the foundation for the debate between science and religion as we'll come to see shortly (i.e. knowledge vs. fear).

According to the show, people  used the skies as a type of "calendar" which gave messages. I too probably would've believed the sky was able to translate some type of message to those watching below. It makes sense. Observe what you can and make decisions, assumptions, guesses, and predictions off of it. The issue as mentioned is the signs meant different things to different people. Here I found it fascinating that people might determine what their fortune might be due to the number of tails on a comet. In the image below, the story as told suggested that one group felt comets brought on the disease smallpox. My question from a faith perspective would be: What is God's purpose for a comet? Is it just another shooting star? These apparitions in the sky tended to induce fear more than anything else, especially when tied with certain events, such as plague and the fire of London. We fear what we don't know/understand. Apparition finds its root in Latin words meaning "to be visible". What about the things we don't see? Should we fear them as well...



Hell's Bells
Nullius in verba. This is the motto for the Royal Society of London, whose sole mission is: To recognise, promote, and support excellence in science and to encourage the development and use of science for the benefit of humanity. Nullius in verba as stated in episode 3, stands for the scientific method (better put, represents it), meaning "see for yourself". "Take nobody's word for it" or "on the word of no one" is the verbatim (i.e. word-for-word) translation of the motto. This is an example of an instance where the conflict between science and religion could have grounds for dispute, especially for Christians who have the Bible, which is termed God's word. To see for yourself means that you would have to examine and find (or witness) verifiable proof of that which is being spoken of. Even if I trusted you, the burden of proof would be on you to show me. As well as the ownness is on me to determine whether you are correct or not [to some degree]. The aim in taking no one's word for it, was to establish facts as a result of experimentation. Is that not the essence of science! Yet, whether we derive or conjure up experiments to determine/discover that which is true, a fact is a fact. I'll admit that the term "fact" has a variety of uses and implications, none of which I'll go into here. For now, might I suggest that if something is true and verifiable it is fact, even if we have yet to verify it.

When I was a younger man I received a birthday card from a colleague with a message in it, for which I took to heart:
"Get to really know our Creator for yourself. Question everything...
never take somebody else's word or experience as your own."
So when it comes to science and trying to attain a level of understanding which is founded in not only what we can see, but also explain; I get it.

Mary Jane
Robert Hooke was mentioned in this episode, the man for which Hooke's law of elasticity is named after. Takes me back to my days in a highschool physics classroom. He also built the first Gregorian Telescope, as well as coined the term "cell" in describing biological organisms; seemingly a precursor to Darwin. Hooke is described as a proponent of biological evolution. Cannabis was also used by Hooke in which he stated: "...no cause of fear, although there may be of laughter." I hear that's common when people get into a game of puff-puff-pass.

Another genius of a man in Isaac Newton, who had been at odds with Hooke over a dispute over who actually produced a certain piece of work, was found to have two hobbies for which both proved non-beneficial to him and humankind. Newton tried his hand at alchemy, a philosophical tradition tied to profound powers, mythology, magic, and spirituality. He was also fruitless in his researching of hidden meanings in the Bible, although he noted that the second coming of Christ would not be before 2060. This was done as a slight at those who were suggesting exact dates, none of which proved true. Newton was indeed a religious man, believing that the Universe is not a "mere machine"; requiring intervention at times. As some have noted, he may have been considered a heretic at the time for he didn't hold a "commonplace" view of Christianity. I'm not so sure how he'd fare today; perhaps slightly better given the ability to be open and free about one's viewpoints without risking too much pushback. Even in Newton's quest to understand or figure things out, there were some things which never worked out for him. So it is with knowledge.

Enemy via Etymology
Now as we wrap this entry up I want to get to the meat of how from an etymological standpoint, science and faith may be "enemies". Philosophy comes from an Ancient Greek word philosophia, which means "love of wisdom". Sophia is the word for Wisdom in the Bible. I believe it literally means wisdom. That makes sense when you think about it, philo (love of) + sophia (wisdom). I think this may be why at times when people speak on philosophical topics all laymen (i.e. regular folk) are able to do is throw their hands up and say: "It's all Greek to me!" Metaphilosophy is the "investigation of the nature of philosophy", a philosophy of philosophy if you will. Going back to philosophy, it entails the "study of general and fundamental problems". Wouldn't it help to understand the purpose of philosophy to better grasp the reasoning behind its use? Science comes from the Latin word meaning "knowledge".

Here we have, a "love of wisdom", the "study of general and fundamental problems", "investigation of the nature of [this study of general and fundamental problems]" and "knowledge". These things aren't bad in and of themselves but sometimes people hold them up as the ultimate form of finding enlightenment or achieving a "knowledge beyond knowledge". The Bible is clear in that having wisdom (actually loving Her), gaining knowledge, and living rightly before the Lord is acceptable and expected. It's when the search for knowledge or quest in our love for wisdom supplants Him and the place he holds in our life. It's like telling someone you love them but not expressing it with your actions, because your actions tend to suggest your love is truly elsewhere.

Science (knowledge), philosophy (study of general/fundamental problems), reason, intelligence, all of these things should be used in combination with religion, faith, and theology. It wouldn't make sense not to! We must be careful what we do with it and that we remain humble in our discoveries.

Towering Over History
In Genesis 11, there's a story of how humans came together in one language and determined themselves to build a city and a tower with its top in the heavens. God came down to see what they were up to and I suppose realized that this was "only the beginning of what they will do", as they were one people and nothing for which they proposed would be impossible. Why would they want the top in the heavens? What purpose would this serve?

For me this story is a reminder of how we can do anything we put our mind to. In fact, this is what has led to great discovery time and time again. The question is, when we unveil something we didn't know before or stumble upon some new wisdom, what will we do with it and will this new knowledge some how change who we are at the core of our being. Some folks will be hostile towards that which they disagree with, but this doesn't mean it has to be that way. I do believe that we all want the same things for ourselves and each other.


Sumthn2Ponder (s2p):
  • Is religion (faith) an enemy of science?

Links for Consideration(L4C):