I have been quietly observing the many posts to this discussion group far a
while, without making any contributions. However, I thought members of the
group might be interested in this contribution to the Sojourners newsletter.
Source: SojoNet 2001 (c) http://www.Sojo.net
Geoff Bagley
S o u l W o r k s
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
An interview with Huston Smith
Huston Smith, one of the world's foremost scholars
of religion, issues a manifesto defending the religious
dimension of human life in his new book, "Why Religion
Matters." Drawing on a lifetime of reading and
experience, Smith tells Amazon.com why, as an
octogenarian, he felt the need to address the basic
issue named by the title of his book and discusses
the wisdom and weaknesses that come with age.
------------
Question: Your book is particularly critical of the
contemporary tendency to view science as the royal
road to knowledge. You're careful to demonstrate that
your argument is not against science per se, but against
"scientism," your term for the prejudice that favors
science over other ways of knowing. Why do you think
that scientism is such a powerful and compelling
way of thinking for so many people? Does scientism appeal
to some weakness that is inherent in human nature?
Smith: Two weaknesses, actually. First, people like
certainty, and science can provide that by weeding
out false hypotheses through laboratory experiments.
We could never have placed people on the moon without
knowledge of laws of nature that have been demonstrated
to be absolutely true. The trouble here is in thinking
that provable knowledge is more important than knowledge
that is only probable. None of the questions that
directly concern us - Shall I marry her? Shall we have
children? What shall I do with my life? - can be answered
with certainty for the sufficient reason that life is
itself uncertain. If we resent that, we should remember
that it is uncertainty that gives us our freedom. If
there were answer books for life's questions, we would
be reduced to robots. Automatons. The second weakness
that fuels scientism is our lust for things. Life is
impossible without some possessions, but to think that
happiness consists in the number of things we possess
is to exaggerate their importance and the importance
of the technologies that produce them.
Question: What if biology gives scientism more ammunition
against the traditional religious worldview? If science
makes further progress in studying the portion of the
brain that is associated with religious experience and
provides biological explanations for how these
experiences are triggered, how might religion be affected?
Smith: Every thought we think is underwritten by neuron
firings in our brains, but those firings are neutral
regarding the truth or falsity of the thoughts they
occasion. The same holds for the validity of our
experiences, religious and otherwise. The brain, like
all parts of the body, can break down and bring on
attendant disabilities, but neuroscientists are not
going to find some points in the brain that generate
true thoughts and others that generate bloopers. Nor
will they find different patterns of neuron firings for
authentic love, on the one hand, and mere infatuation
on the other. The same holds for mystical visions. [ ]
To read the full interview with Huston Smith, go to:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/feature/-/133456/ref=ad_b_chb_2
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Feb 24 2001 - 05:57:55 EST