Essay
On science and
religion
Right:
ADN spiral (Nasa).
«Earth is our
mother, and we are its sons», according to an old Hindu saying.
Human kind has not woven the web of life. We are but one thread
within it», someone wrote, proclaiming rather obvious evidence
(and attributing it to Chief Seattle...) At the bottom of our hearts we all know
of the web connecting us with other animal life, even when we
sometimes deny it.
We don’t like
to be animals, or to be mere animals. We don’t like the idea of
being close relatives of apes, or descendants of insignificant
bacteria; we don’t like not to be at the centre of the Universe.
Hence the resistance to scientific revelations of our affinity
with apes and other animal life.
It wasn’t by
chance that for years
Charles Darwin
postponed his Origin of the
Species. He anticipated the reactions awaiting his
discoveries (which denied his previous most intimate religious creed and
hopes.)
The scientific
view has put an end to the traditional place of man in the
Universe. With scientific revelations, man has lost his special
statute, and become just a trivial product of a «blind
watchmaker», to use a metaphor of Richard Dawkins. We become
apes descendants and «survival machines», largely captives of
genes.
We can
obviously contest some interpretations of the scientific data.
We aren’t «survival machines», «robots» or «apes», in the
narrowest senses of these words. Richard Dawkins, who uses them, admits
this. We are born egoists, but we can teach ourselves
«generosity and altruism», he says. We have the possibility of
upsetting the gene designs, «something that no other species has
ever aspired to do».
But should or
can we refuse scientific statements when supported by
experiments or proof?
If we want to
be honest with ourselves and embrace the truth, the answer can
only be: no. The cruelty of life incites us to dream and
fantasy. Death and pain, always surrounding and peeping in, are
an invitation to evasion. A part of us tends to deny reality.
«Men have always denied reality with all their might» (Jean
Servier). This is something we can excuse as part of our
weaknesses.
But we can’t
live off chimeras, illusions, or cling to old fashioned honoured
ideas or puffed up notions of our essence just to satisfy our
dreams. We shouldn’t feel ashamed about our low and humble
origins. It isn’t them that depreciate us.
What can make
us lose our prestige isn’t our belonging to the ape family or
our insignificant role in the Universe as revealed by science.
What can discredit us are our wrong acts - including our refusal to accept
the truth, or the intellectual cowardice that leads to the
acceptance or the promotion of myth and untruth.
Our dignity is
in our thought, is in our capability of discovering, creating
and accepting truth, raising our standards through our
intelligence, going beyond the illusions dictated by our senses.
Our dignity is in truth, however much she cracks our dreams of
greatness and immortality. It isn’t in the denial of reality.
«Our
insignificance as human animals can’t affront our conscience and
the dignity of rational men», stated
Immanuel Kant in a rather inflated
way, but stressing our intense desire to be rational. But if so,
it would be good not to plunge into the creationist myths
even when supported by science. Science and personal religion
beliefs should be kept apart.
To see more:
For a notable defence of science view against «intelligent
design» see Daniel Dennet in the Best American Science and Nature
writing 2006 (right).
See also:
Science and meaning of
life
