I have a friend that is fairly religious. Actually, I have many friends that are religious but I was just referring to this one because we are prone to having frequent and lengthy discussions on the topic. He is not an in your face, jam it down your throat fanatic and he often challenges his other religious friends to think about some of their commonly held notions about God and their specific religious denomination. He is very knowledgeable about his religion and for that I am appreciative. Nothing is worse than someone that claims to be something yet knows very little about their self proclaimed identity.
Since many of my friends, and even the majority of people I encounter in public settings, are religious, and more specifically Christian due to our demographics, I have studied a lot about their belief systems. For many years of my life I held the exact same views as my friend about the nature of the universe. I truly believed in the same God as him and shared his faith. Over the years my take on religion has changed and I no longer share his view. There was no traumatic moment or disappointment that caused this shift, I just saw the world and the universe differently than I did when I was younger.
I am very appreciative of my friend because he his willing to have honest and meaningful discussions on this topic and doesn't take it as personal challenge when I ask questions about his belief. I have found this isn't the norm with most people. We all have heard the old adage that it is taboo to discuss religion and politics and most people adhere to this suggestion. I have been "unfriended" by many people on Facebook over the years because they hold strong religious views and don't want to hear from someone that isn't just like them. This is exactly my issue with religion. It isn't open to honest discussion and it has little desire to take in other views.
There are a lot of things going on in the world and religion is involved in most aspects of our decision making process simply because the majority of people on the planet are religious. Obviously, politics is usually involved in the process as well. So I find it ironic that it is taboo to discuss the two topics that are responsible for molding the direction we take as an individual, a nation, and even a species. We have to be able to discuss things of this nature if we have any desire to work together to make this life as good as possible for all on the ride.
Because I do not proclaim to be a Christian many of this faith feel the need to assign a label so they can understand me. This seems an anomaly as far as labeling goes: I don't believe in astrology, alchemy, or Islam and no one feels the need to label me a nonastrologist, a nonalchemist, or aislamic. It seems along with this label others believe I claim to know things or am certain about the workings of the universe. I'll be the first to admit I have no idea how it all works and it is probably stranger than I could ever imagine. It also seems that people often make the mistake of assuming I don't want to believe in a higher power. Nothing would make me more happy than to have a higher power that watches over me and reunites me with my loved ones when I no longer exist on this planet. I think it would be great to ask for things and have my higher power grant my requests. And beyond my personal and selfish desires I think it would be wonderful to be able to have my higher power heal others that I pray for and cure them from sickness and disease or lighten their heavy load that life sometimes places on their shoulders. Life is tough at times and it is very comforting to know someone or something is in your corner, feeling alone sucks. So the fact that I don't share this religious view with my friends has nothing to do with a lack of desire to hold this belief. And if I truly and sincerely could have my wish granted as to how the universe operates I would choose the God scenario over one without a God. However, it seems the universe doesn't function according to my wishes.
Simply because others don't share my view of the universe doesn't make me think less of them (not inversely true of their thoughts about me). And I certainly don't think a person's intelligence is in question simply because they believe in a higher power, contrary to popular belief. The only time I ever question a person's intelligence or reasoning skills in when they display conduct that makes we wonder how they draw conclusions. This isn't to say that the conclusion is the thing that gets my attention, it is the process in which one comes to a conclusion that has my interest. The grounds I find it important to make reasoned, logical decisions is simply based on the fact we all have to live together, get along, and make the world a better place and we have to share some common ground.
While engaging in a very lengthy discussion with this particular friend he claimed, even boasted, to have comprehension of scientific principles. We were discussing his reasoning skills and I was challenging them. It was my belief, based on many discussions, that he didn't have as much knowledge in this area as he claimed and many of his conclusions have been based on faulty logic. And finally after several hours of dialogue my belief was confirmed as he exposed the fact he doesn't even understand basic principles in the area of science. That one has no knowledge of certain things isn't a major concern of mine. There are many things that are beyond me and I confess my ignorance. However, when I take a stand and profess to have great knowledge and understanding on any specific topic I usually do. The good news is I rarely do this because the ultimate "truth" about anything is hard to know.
The point of this essay isn't to chastise my friend. He truly is a friend and he challenges my notions about life and makes me sharp. He brings a different perspective to things and for that I am always grateful. The deeper message is centered around the lack of common ground we all seem to operate on. He believes his taxpayer money should be spent on teaching our children "competing" theories in our public education system. He has wrongly concluded there is a "market place of ideas" and things that are "just" theories should be challenged with other theories. This is a gross misunderstanding of how science functions. A theory that has withstood the test of time is greater than any law that has ever been discovered. Theories encompass laws and provide a working model for us to move forward. Whether or not a law is discovered doesn't change the fact that it would still be a law. Gravity happens whether or not you understand the law of gravity and it would still exist if Newton hadn't "discovered" it. However, why it exists, how it exists, and how it operates is explained in the theory of gravity. The law simply makes an observation: when I let go of this apple it drops to the ground. The theory takes this law into account and provides us with an explanation. A theory won't go on to become a law, they are two different things. And it is called a theory because science understands that it is nearly impossible to understand the "truth" about our reality. Theories that have been around a long time are revered in science because they have provided the best working model, the best explanation of how things work, for all of us to move forward.
If one is brazen enough to dismiss a universally accepted theory that is fine, but at least understand what that means. That means you are going against the smartest minds on the planet that have devoted their entire lives to trying to explain things in the most accurate and concise ways possible. Because a consensus of scientists believe something certainly doesn't make it true. One man shattered the consensus about our universe within the last one hundred years by explaining his ideas about time/space. His theory is still around and we think he is one of the smartest people to ever walk the planet. However, someone else might come around someday and shatter his theory. But until that day his explanation is the best we have to go on. If we fail to use the best working model available we perform a major injustice to our species (and quite possibly all of the other species on this planet).
Science isn't a god to me, it is fallible. That's the beauty of science. And there are things I believe in my gut that science has wrong. I can't help but feel our understanding of time is off. I've held this notion for the majority of my life. However, simply because I feel it or believe it doesn't make it so. And many great minds have provided an amazing working model of time and it is the best we have to offer as far as how it works and effects everything within its fabric. As I continue to absorb all the information about time available I'm always trying to figure it out more, what it is, what it means to me and everything else. I even question whether or not it's real. As science has introduced the idea of many more dimensions I feel strengthened in my belief that we are missing something about time or are measuring it incorrectly. And even though science has created devices that can track time for a billion years with incredible accuracy, eventually the devices still fail to measure time precisely. This only leads me to believe even more that we don't have it right as far as time goes. Yet, these are just my beliefs. Should we teach them to our children? Absolutely not. We should teach them the best explanation possible at the moment. That explanation is nowhere near my explanation (even though mine isn't really an explanation, more of a doubt about our understanding). If something in the future comes along that changes what we know of time then we should teach that. However, this doesn't diminish the fact that our current understanding (working model) is less valuable to us. If something better comes along it will certainly have benefited from our current understanding. And how could something better come along if we weren't using the best working model available to us at all times?
I don't suggest people challenge their belief system simply for fun. I suggest we do so because of the stakes involved. What we pass on to our children is the only true measure of our greatness. If we pass on the lesser of two (or four or twelve) ideas we are performing a major injustice to the universe, let alone our offspring. No doubt there is a "market place" of ideas but there is almost always only one that is accepted as the best. The acceptance isn't based on personal want, or wishful thinking, or it sounds cool, it is accepted as the best because it is the best way to explain things, even if it's only temporary. If one chooses not to accept the consensus working model of any given topic then one must certainly expect to be challenged. This challenge isn't about the great knowledge someone else has and a feeling of being threatened, it is about the audacity of the one who professes a better understanding than the one most accepted. It's not even about right and wrong per se because these things seem unknowable most of the time, if not all. We have to have common ground. And what better place to find common ground than agreeing to use the best explanations of things available at the current moment. One is still free to have doubts about the explanation, I have my doubts about many things. But one shouldn't have the right to impose their beliefs on others by teaching it in our schools and retarding the growing brain of a young child simply because of their particular stance. We have to agree on these most basic of ideas. Yet, this is where we seem to disagree the most.
No comments:
Post a Comment