Does Truth Come From Science Or From God?

Dear Reader,

It would appear that although science and technology can be seen to have progressively created considerable destructive power (both in war and towards the environment) over the past few centuries, they seem to be more and more promoted as the basic tools of civilisation.

Apart from the arts (often now decried as less important by economy-minded governments), what is there left as a means of contemplation to balance the cerebral orientation of our educational system? The left-hand side of the brain surely needs to be heard just as much as the right-side!

But before I go any further, how religious studies at schools are covered is not, in my view, an answer to this issue; secular education does not try to enter the spirit, as it were, of religion nor spirituality. Alas, secular teachers do not know the truths that are available from true spiritual teachers, nor can they be expected to.

In 1930, a leading Jewish Rabbi wrote this piece in defence of both science and religion ('religion' here does not mean simply rituals):

The method of science is observation, that of religion [is] contemplation. Science investigates; religion interprets. One seeks causes, the other ends. Science thinks in terms of history, religion in terms of teleology. One is a survey, the other an outlook. Religion and science are the two hemispheres of human thought. They are different though converging truths. They grow binately.

Both science and religion spring from the same seeds of vital human needs. Science is the response to the human need for knowledge and power. Religion is the response to human need for hope and certitude. One is an outreaching for mastery, the other for perfection. Both are man-made, and like man himself, are hedged about with limitations. Science can see only those things which man is equipped to see—and his equipment is sadly deficient. Man cannot transcend his own humanity. Science, vitiated by the constricted agencies of human cognition and by the definitive organization of the human brain, cannot lay claim to an order of truth which is objective and absolute, nor can religion lay claim to perfect and final truth on the authority of some supernatural revelation. All truth comes to man by way of his mind-groping and the compelling needs and experiences of his life.

Neither religion nor science, by itself, is sufficient for man. Science is not civilization. Science is organized knowledge; but civilization, which is the art of noble and progressive communal living, requires much more than knowledge. It needs beauty, which is art, and faith and moral aspiration, which are religion. It needs artistic and spiritual values along with the intellectual. Man, too, in his individual capacity requires much more than organized knowledge for his life’s equipment.

Science and religion are not rivals. They are each other’s complement and man’s binocular vision. In the past science frequently aided religion to correct its perspectives and religion has delivered science from the pitfalls of naturalism, materialistic monism, and moral nihilism. It is only when one presumes to be the oracle at the other’s shrine that confusion ensues. 

When the scientist from his laboratory, on the basis of alleged scientific knowledge, presumes to issue pronouncements on God, on the origin and destiny of life, on the purposes of creation, and on man’s place in the scheme of things, he is passing out worthless checks. The funds of his scientific data are utterly insufficient for such large orders. When the religionist delivers ultimatums to the scientist on the basis of certain hierarchic cosmologies embedded in his sacred texts or when he rummages about the storerooms of geology, chemistry, or biology for some scraps of sanction or some random affidavits to support his claims, he is a sorry spectacle indeed.

The above was written by Abba Hillel Silver (a leading Rabbi, 1893-1963), as long ago as 1930, in 'Religion in a Changing World' (New York: Richard R. Smith, 1930), pp. 29-37.

Since then (1930), science has evolved quite considerably, and in quite a few areas shows signs of meeting with religion/spirituality. But such is the way that science has developed into ever-specialised departments, there is little method of drawing together all the findings to present a whole. And, besides, the findings of science are always shifting.

Most (or many) scientists continue to dwell in their own labs, concentrating and analysing to an infinite degree on the topic of their specialisation, forgetting or disregarding the fact that truth can only be fully seen from a holistic perspective. 

Hence, not thinking holistically, disrespect developed for nature in the West, both environmentally and towards all other life-forms. Eastern spirituality and education do not share the hitherto Western view. But some modern Western scientists have broken away from what had become the traditional mould of thinking.

The remarkable expert on Celtic Spirituality, Father Sean Olaore, PhD, refers to how Genesis 1:26 has been misinterpreted by mankind. The New International Version of the Bible renders this passage as follows:

Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

The misapplication of this authority has caused much of the ecological problems of today. Father Olaore states:

The single most important teaching of Celtic spirituality is respect for Nature. Unlike ... Genesis 1:26 which is constantly misinterpreted in the West as God giving humans the right to subdue nature, the Celts saw humans and nature as partners in a divinely-choreographed dance. Hence the goddesses are the archetypes of nature while the gods are the archetypes of culture. Culture and nature are passionate lovers not bitter rivals. And ... the mission of the ovate/prophet was to continually call culture back into alignment with nature.

Father Olaore goes on:

[An] order of wisdom keepers was the Druids. They were the intellectual giants of the Celtic world. They were the scientists and astronomers. And for the Celts, as for many ancient peoples like the Sumerians, Egyptians and Mayans, astronomy was based on the deep realization that the universe, as a whole, is an interrelated puzzle with all the parts being in significant relationships. All life is energized by this web and information exchange. The heavenly bodies are not merely dead rocks spinning in mind-less space, nor fiery nuclear furnaces burning themselves into ashes. They are intelligent partners in the cosmic dance, and humans had better learn the steps.

The druids were also the philosophers and psychologists delving into the meaning of the intra-psychic cosmos and its fractal representation of life’s ultimate purpose. As theologians and priests, they attempted to understand and dialogue with the goddesses and gods. As healers, they tried to restore and maintain balance among all these moving parts.

It is perhaps worth mentioning that it is thought that Druids attended university from a young age for about 20 years to imbibe the sciences as a holistic study. 

Unfortunately, Father Olaore (though he is aware) does not mention the feats of ancient Indian cosmologists (scientists and astronomers) who, similarly, were also spiritual people - they viewed the world as being an emanation of God and to be studied holistically in that light. They came to many great scientific conclusions that only began to be realised in the West in the past 500 years and less. It did not need science to be separated from spiritual philosophy to achieve that, therefore why do it?!

As stated earlier, some modern scientists have broken away from the mould of thinking that has developed in the scientific world over the past four hundred years. Two foremost English scientists of this modern mould are Peter Russell and Rupert Sheldrake. Both enjoy an extensive following, but Rupert Sheldrake perhaps even more so. 

A PhD, he was Principal Plant Physiologist at the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics in Hyderabad, India. From 2005 to 2010 he was Director of the Perrott-Warrick project for research on unexplained human and animal abilities, funded by Trinity College, Cambridge.

Sheldrake is a regular speaker at leading institutions in holistic science and technology, including Schumacher College. In a TED video talk given in 2013 on the 'Science Delusion' he was banned by TED but such was the vociferous call for his restitution, Sheldrake's video and reputation were restored. He is very open to sound spiritual ideas, especially in relation to explaining the scientific aspects of the world and of nature.

Through the efforts of such people as Sheldrake, there is now a remarkable tilt towards the acceptance of religion (in its widest sense) and science comprising one broad (yet intertwined) base of resources and knowledge. They are not really separate nor can ever be, though one-sided intellectuals of either camp may believe otherwise.

The main problem for today is, however, that our mainstream educational institutions and scientific establishments have by no means yet caught up; the general view is that materialist science is the way forward and it was the proponents of that view that caused Sheldrake's ban on TED. Sheldrake has now been vindicated and his style of thinking is being accepted more.

Holistic thinking is the future of the world - the world cannot be treated as two distinct realms. As Einstein said: "Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind". Again, "religion" in this context is not supposed to mean matters to do with rituals.

Thank you for reading this.