Boy, has that a lot of meanings….
But consider this version of ‘cosmos’…
According to Lawrence Krauss of NEWScientist magazine, David Brook wrote in The New York Times in May that
“…while we moderns see space as a black, cold, mostly empty vastness, with planets and stars propelled by gravitational and other forces, Europeans in the Middle Ages saw a more intimate and magical place. The heavens, to them, were a ceiling of moving spheres, rippling with signs and symbols, and moved by the love of God… The modern view disenchants the universe and tends to make it ‘all fact and no meaning’.”
YIKES! This is a world-view a 5 year-old would not embrace.
Brooks’s article reflects a popular view of science and technology shared the world over. For too many and for too long, the complexity and majesty of the inner workings of the universe, a cell phone or a blender – robs some of the ghostliness and the mercurial wonder fulfilled by myth, superstition and religion.
Only the hopelessly lost and the cynical would suggest that medieval banter, hallucinations, and fantasy are of greater value to man today and our future than the actual workings of the universe.
This romanticized fantasy and yearning for the “good ‘ol days” is more frequent and pervasive in times of great change and upheaval when all the absolutes are evaporating in a short course of accelerated science.
On the opposite end, the spiritual and mythical universe is anchored among our fundamentalist religious myths, along with virgin births, booga-booga incantations and other intellectually lazy creations of simple minds where answers must be keep equally simple rather than accurate or non-existent. Brooks’s column referenced Barack Obama’s much-maligned statement that – some people turn to religion and guns for refuge from the inequities that abound. From the response, Obama must have struck a note that many people would rather not hear.
Science is not necessarily a comfortable place to hang out. It certainly is not for everyone. For those that do hang out in the library, lab, or field explorations, it is laughable to have naysayers poo-poo science while they are clogging their brain arteries with cholesterol, The Simpson’s and Brittany Spears. When it comes to an emergency cure for clogged arteries, some neurosurgeon with 25 years of science philosophy, practice, and imagination will be paged to save his life. There is no current cure for The Simpson’s and Brittany Spears brain clogged arteries.
A lot has happened since the discovery of the new world. Sailors from those ancient times mentioned above learned that the constellations in the sky were a ‘tool’ to navigate and an aid to their survival. Many could only wonder if the same star constellations existed in the other hemispheres around the globe. The light from the stars of other galaxies takes billions of years to reach us. Those sailors saw light that is ceased to glow since then. It seems that surely expands the imagination more than incense, fables and war-lording that’s provoked by religions feuding over who are the ‘delivered’ people.
The skies are not inhabited by mythical beasts, nymphs or fairies. But, yes, their may be life out there or a version of it that some of us can agree on.
Worldwide superstition is based on fear and lack of understanding of the relationships between entities in the universe. Until we learn to separate mythical thinking from a knowledge base developed empirically, we’ll continue to invent alternative realities to justify whatever is the current superstition. Thus, for now it is important that we get an accelerated perspective on what is imaginary and what is real.
Why does it matter if people cling to myths for solace from the confusion?
It matters because real-world problems such as hate, hunger, disease, genocide, and climate change can only be solved by real-world thinking. That will require that people get uncomfortable. Our “raison d’être” is survival. Nature doesn’t exist to serve humanity. It is ruthless. It knows nothing about accounting or retirement or children in religious sects. While it is hard today to abandon silliness, it will become even harder when consequences of superstition are racking every thing on earth – especially when our own survival is at stake.
Recounting myths and calling it ‘tradition’ does the world a disservice. Myths put humans at the center of everything. That is a big error. Be suspicious of those that promote human based logic. By acquiescing to some ‘harmless’ superstitious practices the weary and confused are distracted from selections about the future that even doom their wishful thinking that is the staple of supernatural thought.
None of this is easy so lets get started right away.
~~~~~~
Hmmmm.
I think you contradict yourself on this one a little bit, txjhb.
You say, “Be suspicious of those that promote human based logic.”
Isn’t that what science is? The laws of the universe, as we know them, are the musings and understandings of humans that have been discovered, written down, and shared with humans on the planet Earth about how things behave within the realm of the world we know.
To draw an analogy using another scientist, Plato, we are in our Cave (everything we know) and we hypothesize that the scientific laws we know will apply to everything outside the Cave (everything we don’t know).
From that kind of perspective, religion is very much a science to me. I’m not talking about the dogma, bogeymen, robes, and rituals that you debunk in your objections to religion. But I do believe there is a scientific reason for creation myths…the myths are carriers for a human behavior virus called religion, which helps individuals change their behavior from logical and practical (I must live at all costs and think selfishly) to one that is illogical, risky and impractical (if I help someone else, they will help me and we will both be better for it).
Tit-for-tat experiments. Nash Equilibriums. Collaborative economics. These scientific experiments, math equations, and Nobel Prize winning ideas reinforce much of what religion is all about…but the experiments and proofs are thousands of years late for human society. If we had waited for Nash to not only prove his equilibrium, but then explain it to every uneducated person on the planet in every language and make it apply to their daily lives…well, that wouldn’t happen.
Yet somehow, regardless of language, education, sex, geographic surroundings, societies around the globe found a way (spontaneously and relatively simultaneously) to notate all the social behaviors that would benefit their group and community, and pass it down to another generation, in a way that deflects the hard questions (all things still unexplained) while still getting the collaborative group behavior as the end result.
So…in some ways, “God” is an operating system for a better human behavior. You could say…a “spirit” that is ever present within the community.
That begs the question…why the Father, the Son, or some other big bad bogey man?
Perhaps the ancients realized two things…
1) Not everyone loves math. No matter how hard you try, Nash Equilibriums for Collaborative Human Behavior equations will bore the majority to tears…and you’ll fail.
2) Fear is a powerful motivator. And if there is a belief that something bigger than anything human will crush you if the rules aren’t followed…you’ll get the non-math people.
I’m all for a Universal Code that can be understood and followed by everyone, regardless of education, sex, geography, income, race, etc. That would be a behavioral science goal worth pursuing for all of us.
(Footnote: I personally think that there is plenty of room for science and spirituality to co-exist. One keeps you humble and respectful of all the things you don’t know and the people around you, while the other helps close the gap between the known and unknown.
Unfortunately, we all too often get distracted by pieces of the “wrappers” of the operating systems called religion…the dogma, rituals & stories that are meant to help carry the code…don’t eat meat on Fridays, wear a hat so you don’t offend God, don’t eat pork, etc. )
hummmm…
Perhaps I did. I may do it some more but I would rather try and state more succinctly my points and leave it at that.
Let’s see if I can do that.
First the a piece referred to David Brook’s article in the NYT that “we moderns” and then went on to speak for that group. He has an ‘out’ there ‘cause no one knows who is part of that group.
The premise is that…
~~~~ the romantic, magical mussing of yester-year about the stars and the “heavens” [which is a learned but indefensible judo-Christian concept used punitively with hell to control others] is more attractive, or has more value, than seeing the universe with an empirical eye and dealing with its contents, whatever they be, rather than as a playstation of entities “moved by the love of God”. Let me use another time and place to itemize how the “love of God” has worked out for civilization.
Finding out what is ‘out there’ and what it means is not man-based logic if that was what you identify as a contradiction.
I contend that Plato allegory you refer to would never have been used if man kept to his magic and myths; we’d still be in THAT cave. It is not a swaying argument to use Plato to argue against logic. Using an ancient scholar at all appears to be an extreme case of reminiscing that Brook too was doing that launched this discussion. But, moving on, what is outside the cave is parallel to finding out what is outside the earth’s gravity. It is not easy and education is essential and, as always, that comes at the cost of losing ‘traditions’ and superstitions. Education will do that, consistently.
– Today women vote
– Today cars go faster than 40 mph
– Today personal equality works better than ever
– Fluoride does not cause cancer or polio
– Blacks get to own land… you get the idea… all traditions and superstitions that fell by the wayside
Finding out what is out there is ‘other’ based logic in that the elements of the things out there [the cave or the solar system] have to be discovered to measure and test what’s what – separate from the one doing the measuring. The laws of the universe are what many are after; not the laws of man, limas or ant colonies. They are the same laws for those in Darfur and for Detroit, Budapest and Perth. And, for the record the arguments of quantum mechanics are important and relevant to finding out what is ‘out there’.
This search for the laws of the universe use empiricism. Where that isn’t possible the theory is such that it is testable so that empirical relationships can be found when tools are available. If none are found then it is rejected or kept on hold until another data set contradicts it or supports it. Empiricism isn’t the framework because I say it is so or the pope or monks say it is so. It is so because it is one way to organize what we know from what we don’t know that has allowed some great things to happen.
For instance, what information is acceptable is not dependent on who does the measuring. Acceptability depends on replication and supporting logic that is public rather than private, or a function of divinity, magic or supernatural manifestations. Discrepancies are public events as well and disputed rather than decreed one way or another as is the trait of charlatans, witches, spiritual advisors, rabbis, Popes, and Mullahs of different titles.
You say that religion is a science to you. It does require that it follow the above and many more tenants of science to be considered science by others. After all, we are trying to find the universal laws and not the laws of individuals which may or may not explain what is ‘out there.’
But, your point is popular. You have that going for you. Hundreds of millions of people follow their religion as if were law. How’s that working? For a review of how that has worked out you can check any of the recent critiques of religion of late or you can check history yourself and see how many wars and kingdoms and civilizations have changed over interpretations of what the right belief system. Yes, they are correlations and not causal. But then again, you already know that cause and effect is another form of myth.
Please do not proselytize that religion is good, moral-bound, the basis for man’s or Earth’s survival. And on a similar note the Nobel Prizes do not reinforce what religion is all about. Hyperbolae strikes! Please send any data to my attention immediately.
The analogy of ‘“God” being an operating system for better human behavior’ is not supported by fable or fact. Operating systems crash, are unpredictable under processes and need constant upgrading. Do you really want to use a mechanical device for God? Check Google news and see where that myth lies. …No pun intended…
Your statement that “if there is a belief that something bigger than anything human will crush you if the rules aren’t followed…you’ll get the non-math people” shows that, for some, it is still a very small cave. What rules are those you refer to?: Old Testament, new testament, Gideon’s version, Yeshiva’s logic, Buddha’s or Santa’s?
Last, my point it this…myth, superstition and fear come from ignorance. Ignorance finds a home when the observer hides in complacency and status quo that over time calcifies to dogma. Today’s enlightenment is tomorrow’s foolishness. By praising the foolishness of past hallucinations and myths we have not left Plato’s cave. What’s more, by romanticizing our past we certainly don’t understand that we have a boat-load of current superstitions and myths that continue to block the cave’s entrance.
Besides, I don’t like any caves I’ve ever been in.