Pilgrimage ~ Day 6

I was watching a documentary recently, in which Jonathan Young, Founding Curator of the Joseph Campbell archives said, "In the ancient world, the philosophers were the scientists. There was no clear distinction between hard research and the illogical speculations. All serious thinkers were trying to figure out the nature of reality. Now we consider these to be separate pursuits."

I also came across an article which quoted Professor Stephen Hawking, in response to audience questions at the BBC Reith Lectures, as saying that humanity is at risk from a series of dangers of our own making, singling out nuclear war, global warming and genetically-engineered viruses in particular. He said that further progress in science and technology will create "new ways things can go wrong". Asked for advice for young scientists, he said that they should retain a sense of wonder about "our vast and complex" universe and also that, "It's important to ensure that these changes are heading in the right directions. In a democratic society, this means that everyone needs to have a basic understanding of science to make informed decisions about the future. So communicate plainly what you are trying to do in science, and who knows, you might even end up understanding it yourself".

I would like to throw in some quotations from Einstein:

"No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it"

"Intellectuals solve problems; geniuses prevent them"

"The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education" 
"Try not to become a man of success, but rather try to become a man of value"
"Logic will get you from A to B. Imagination will take you everywhere"

"To raise new questions, new possibilities, to regard old problems from a new angle, requires creative imagination and marks real advance in science" 
"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination"
"Most people say that it is the intellect which makes a great scientist.
They are wrong: it is character" 

There is a depth of wisdom contained in all of the above, communicating the complexity of the human mind - its logic, imagination, intelligence and creativity, but most especially of how it is that we limit ourselves and any real progress of science because of our agreeing to place a much higher value on an acquisition of knowledge, repetition of result and the use of logic rather than on imagination and intuition.

It is not science per se that people need to be cautious about, but the worship of a primacy of the mind and what is deemed as a rationality of thought, which has been gathering steam since the Age of Enlightenment, otherwise known as the Age of Reason. It marks a world view which relegates a sense of wonder, mystery and awareness of the sacred as of less value and importance than that which can be observed, learned or deduced through the mind.

When science is viewed and interpreted through such a lens, can it be any surprise then, about how it is harnessed and used to address the problems of the world? Or that it gives rise to the concerns about technology and the dangers of our own making that Professor Hawking has expressed above? Remember what Carl Sagan said about how "Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of knowledge".

It is natural that humanity should contemplate its existence and possible purpose. Part of that will be a desire to know its origin. It has been said that all religions, arts and sciences are branches of the same tree. Science approaches some of our fundamental questions by looking for evidence. Evidence is a body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

So in other words, reputable data, together with the capacity of the mind or of technology to extrapolate and to form conclusions, is relied upon as being a reliable and preferred navigator of truth. This then, forms the basis of reason and of any philosophies (including political and economic), technologies or applications of how such data can be used.

Religion approaches the same questions about origin and purpose with a presupposition that a God, Gods or the supernatural exists. If religion, science and philosophy are all seeking the same thing, i.e. truth or an illumination of reality, then what is causing any sense of conflict between them is disagreement as to how such illumination may be possible and of who we become through the process.

Although a divergence of human thought between the secular and the religious, together with a sense of conflict can be productive, particularly as a means of honing reason and for building character, the use of force as a means to stifle collective thought harks back to an age of tribalism and of a hierarchical rule. To quote Einstein again, "Peace cannot be kept by force; it can only be achieved by understanding".

In the midst of much dissent will often be seen a savior, and in a modern day world it is the scholars and the think tanks, as they usher in various political and socioeconomic philosophies, carefully engineered to both create the basis for and to bridge a gap, promising to offer to the world a renewed sense of purpose and of what it is to be human.

Whether it is acknowledged or not, at the root of what is being explored is the nature of the human will, together with how our state of consciousness both perceives and experiences itself within reality. It is the human will which strives to establish a sense of well-being for itself and this creates an imaginary hierarchy and is the basis for greed in the world. This will remain true whether our inclination is of a religious or secular nature.

A view of religion has shown us how the human ego can interpret its value, encourage the construction of palaces and accumulation of precious metals. Similarly, a path of science and of academia can follow the same trend, although an expression of what is considered to be palaces and wealth might differ. There would also appear to be a clear focus upon an accumulation and preservation of wealth, power and influence in the midst of the political and socioeconomic philosophy of today.

It is probable that despite any insistence upon or any extent of searching for, there can be no map, guide book or otherwise body of truth, whether of religious or secular, which has a capability to deliver humanity into an experience of utopia. It would seem evident that illumination cannot come from without, it has to come from within. As I have quoted Einstein so much throughout this piece, I will finish with some more of his words:

"There comes a time when the mind takes a higher plane of knowledge

but can never prove how it got there"

"That deep emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God"