The Future of Humanity: Interface of Science and Spirituality

By : CD Sebastian 12/27/2007 2:34:57 AM

The sphere of influence of science and religion interface is gathering momentum. As there is a greater dialogue these days among the practitioners of different religions, so also science-religion dialogue is, in fact, taking place now. A. N. Whitehead had observed that the future of humanity would depend on the interfacing of science and spirituality. He wrote: “It is no exaggeration to say that the future course of history depends on the decision of this generation as to the relation between religion and science.” This is my conviction that science and religion cannot be treated in two independent waiter-tight compartments, as far as human being is concerned. I am fully appreciative and convinced of the learned scholar Fritjof Capra’s view: “Science does not need religion; religion does not need science; but humans need both.”

Although the Galileo case, as it is called, provides the classical example of confrontation between science and faith, it is really in the misappropriation of modern science in the 17th and 18th centuries to mistakenly establish the foundations for religious belief that we find the roots of a much more deep-seated confrontation. From these roots, in fact, sprung the divorce between science and faith and, thus, atheism. The general tone of late 19th century-encounter between religion and the natural sciences was a strong positivist view of history. Here one is reminded of the words of Francis Bacon in his essay Of Atheism in 1607: “A little philosophy inclineth a man’s heart to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men’s minds about to religion.”

Is man a creation of God, or is God a creation of man? The vast majority of the matter in the universe exists in conditions that are not even remotely similar to anything we are familiar with on earth. The unexpected nature of what is outside our world makes us get bewildered. Some writers have been so impressed that they have regarded the success of the theories of modern cosmology as a convincing demonstration that the existence of a God is not indeed. The cosmos is considered by them as self-consistent and not requiring an intelligent designer God to account for the apparent order that appears at all scales from cosmological and infinitesimal. They are in fact generally dumb-founded at the large numbers of their fellow humans who maintain their faith in God in the face of what seems to them extremely convincing arguments to the contrary, and who regard God as the first cause of every thing in the universe.

There is a popular perception that science, particularly astrophysical cosmology, is at odds with religion and spirituality. There are a number of factors that contribute to this perception: firstly, it is because of a purely literal reading of the religious scriptures, ignoring the context of the writings; secondly, the conflict may also be fueled by the apparent lack of mention of God in scientific articles. However, let us remind ourselves that, all scientific research is based on a process of starting with certain assumptions, attempting to predict what will evolve as a consequence of those assumptions, and testing the predictions. This process is simply not applicable if one’s starting point is an omnipotent being with the freedom to act in any way He chooses. A. M. Sandorfi and M. Khandarker writes in this connection: “Faced with this, believers who are scientists, such as ourselves, assume the universe was created by God with magnificently beautiful intricacy which is our joy to unravel through a long process of building models with various starting points, predicting their consequences and searching for evidence that either confirms or refutes.”

Though there are certainly a few high-profile individuals who have been very vocal and effective at promoting the tenets of Scientific Rationalism to deny the existence of God, it is a fact that believers among the scientific community are on the increase. There are scientists who consider themselves believers in God whose number would be more than fifty percent. The survey published by Larson and Witham in 1997 stated that thirty nine percent of mathematicians, biologists, physicists, and astronomers expressed personal belief in God who interacts with the creation. In the past century, and especially in the last few decades, science has enjoyed enormous success in predicting the course of many different interactions. But the assumption that every interaction is predictable is an enormous extrapolation, one that never be verified. Here each individual has a choice, whether to be open to the interaction with God or to close the door to that possibility. That is why Francis S. Collins, renowned geneticist, writes in his recent book: “I am a scientist and a believer, and I find no conflict between those two world views. As the director of the Human Genome Project, I have led a consortium of scientists to read out the 3.1 billion letters of human genome, our own DNA instruction book. As a believer, I see DNA, the information molecule of all living things, as God’s language, and the elegance and complexity of our own bodies and the rest of nature as a reflection of God’s plan.” Similarly centuries ago there was a Congress of Philosophy, held by King Janaka. Here sage Yajnavalkya was asked by Gargi: “What is situated above the earth, below the sky, and between the earth and sky?” The answer was “the Supreme Being”. Let our science and spirituality help us to know that reality.

Science develops best when its concepts and conclusions are integrated into the broader human culture and its concerns for ultimate meaning and value. Scientists can come to appreciate for themselves that the discoveries and inventions cannot be a substitute for knowledge of the truly ultimate. Science can purify religion from error and superstition; religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes. Each can draw one another into a wider world, a world in which each can flourish. String Theory and Superstring Theory speak the language of metaphysics and spirituality, as I understand it. For a comprehensive apprehension of reality as such, a nonlinear multivariate approach of science and religion is necessary. I submit that the value of interconnection, interface and confluence of science and spirituality forms the basis of this multimodal approach since they cannot and should not exist independent of each other. “The dialogue of science and the spiritual traditions is of great geopolitical significance as well. It can bring new motivations for how one treats other persons, other traditions, other animals, and the planet itself.” It leads us to world peace and order.

(This paper was presented at the International Conference on Science and Spirituality for World Peace held at the RIMS Jubilee Hall in Imphal on November 23-24, 2007. The writer is presently teaching at the IIT Bombay)


Source http://www.ifp.co.in/ArticleFull.asp?ArticleID=222