In the potential collaboration between science and religion to lead us forward, what part can science play?
Today’s Post
Last week we saw how Jonathan Sacks, former British Chief Rabbi, understood the potential role that religion could play with science in the further evolution of humans on this planet.
This week, we will look at the ‘other side of the coin’ to see his thoughts on the potential role of science.
Religion’s Need for Science
Just as the left- brained perspectives of science are in need of the right-brained balance of religion, as implicitly recognized by Norberg, so the perspectives of religion are in need of the left-brained balance of science.
The claims of all forms of religion are based on metaphorical beliefs, many of which cannot be held by those who are powering the ‘progress’ curve outlined by Norberg. As we saw in the case of Thomas Jefferson, he systematically stripped the gospels of such ‘miraculous’ teachings to reveal what he considered to be the bedrock of “The Teachings of Jesus”. He then applied them to his underlying (and asserted as ‘self-evident’) assertions of the value, equality, and dignity of the individual human person.
Many educated persons believe that scientific insight will eventually replace religion as the basis of human action. It is certainly true that in the past two hundred or so years, many religious teachings have become unacceptable due to the rise of empiricism, such as the formal blaming of the Jewish race for the death of Jesus, the seven literal days of creation, and so on. The continuing value of religion in many parts of the world is due more to its ability to push back on state corruption and savagery than its teachings on reincarnation and virgin births. But with the increasing evolution of state structures more benign to the human person, such as that found in democracies, the underlying importance that religion places on the individual human person plays a larger role.
For religion to continue to play a role in this evolution, it must be seen as relevant. As Sacks sees it:
“Religion needs science because we cannot apply God’s will to the world if we do not understand the world. If we try to, the result will be magic or misplaced supernaturalism.”
The Road to Synthesis
So, how do we get to the point where right- and left- brain process are balanced? Sacks addresses what happens when we don’t:
“Bad things happen when religion ceases to hold itself answerable to empirical reality, when it creates devastation and cruelty on earth for the sake of salvation in heaven. And bad things happen when science declares itself the last word on the human condition and engages in social or bioengineering, treating humans as objects rather than as subjects, and substitution of cause and effect for reflection, will and choice.”
He recognizes that science and religion have their own way of asking questions and searching for answers, but doesn’t see it as a basis for compartmentalization, in which they are seen ascompletely separate worlds. Like Teilhard, he sees the potential for synergy
“..because they are about the same world within which we live, breathe and have our being”.
He sees the starting point for such synergy as “conversation”, in hopes that it will lead to “integration”. From Sacks’ perspective:
“Science needs religion, or at the very least some philosophical understanding of the human condition and our place within the universe, for each fresh item of knowledge and each new accession of power raises the question of how it should be used, and for that we need another way of thinking.”
Even though Sacks doesn’t place his beliefs in an explicitly evolutionary context, he does envision a more whole human person which emerges as a result of a more complete balance between the influence of the ‘right’ and ‘left’ brains (modes of engaging reality). In this sense, he echoes Teilhard’s belief of ‘fuller being’ resulting from ‘closer union’.
The Next Post
This week we have seen how Jonathan Sacks echoes Teilhard’s call for a fresh approach to the potential synergy between religion and science. Like Teilhard, he concludes that the success of the West requires a balanced synergy between science and religion if it is to continue.
Next week, we will apply Teilhard’s ‘lens of evolution’ to ‘rethinking’ both religion and science, by seeing how both must continue to evolve if they are to hold up their end of the relationship.