Some more on sapiens
There was this passage in Sapiens that I found to be of even more interest as compared with the rest. It was about knowledge(science) and religion. I couldn’t quote it verbatim. But more or less have tried to bring out the essence of those sections. It says, science is humble at the point where it openly admits collective ignorance regarding the most important questions. No Scientist, even Darwin for that matter, never argued that “Evolution of species” is the “Seal of the Biologists” and that the riddle of evolution has been solved once and for all. It’s a theory which was and is still getting validated every day with more proofs and evidence. Truth is a poor test for knowledge. The real test is utility. No scientist had ever proclaimed saying that there was no God and science IS the answer to everything. In fact, the more famous ones were devout followers of God and one weird haired guy, inarguably the best of his lot, commented that “God didn’t play dice with the universe”.
The point being driven was that, while science or scientists, never have any all knowing ego and are humble, theologists, religious scholars and philosophers , use the very opposite of it to promote their point – An all knowing and omnipotent God. Anyone with an unsolvable or impossible problem, from perspective of science or medicine, have always been advised and even otherwise, reach out to a higher source and anything that comes out positive is identified as a miracle. God is more often than not projected as a magician and someone to reach out to incase of turmoil. From the beginning of this practice of religion, people shower him with gifts to keep him happy and offer him sacrifices to get his mercy and help. Almost every religious leader at some point of time or other, would’ve mentioned that his faith has answers for everything. And the more scholarly the person is, he/she would be able to explain everything in quotable quotes. Beyond a point, when people are unable to understand or follow, they are told that certain things can only be experienced and not explained. Philosophy has never been found wanting for an answer. Philosophers may be.
It is for this fact that some of my friends have been advised not to read “Sapiens”. One colleague of mine who is a devout Christian told me the same. She has been told by her cousins that she may take offence to certain sections of the book. Same happened during “Da Vinci Code” and same happens with any book taking a different view on any religion out there. Why mere words create such a big furor because, all these are spread via word of mouth and sayings and couplets. By recording something on print or any other format, it goes against their very grain of sand of creation and existence. With more and more people following religions without understanding its essence and equal, if not more number becoming atheists or non-followers of any religion, fueled by population explosion, the arena is getting bigger and bigger. Some day it would eventually lead to a new crusade – a coalition of all religions - against the non-believers. And finally those who are left behind would be true believers – be of god or of science.
The point being driven was that, while science or scientists, never have any all knowing ego and are humble, theologists, religious scholars and philosophers , use the very opposite of it to promote their point – An all knowing and omnipotent God. Anyone with an unsolvable or impossible problem, from perspective of science or medicine, have always been advised and even otherwise, reach out to a higher source and anything that comes out positive is identified as a miracle. God is more often than not projected as a magician and someone to reach out to incase of turmoil. From the beginning of this practice of religion, people shower him with gifts to keep him happy and offer him sacrifices to get his mercy and help. Almost every religious leader at some point of time or other, would’ve mentioned that his faith has answers for everything. And the more scholarly the person is, he/she would be able to explain everything in quotable quotes. Beyond a point, when people are unable to understand or follow, they are told that certain things can only be experienced and not explained. Philosophy has never been found wanting for an answer. Philosophers may be.
It is for this fact that some of my friends have been advised not to read “Sapiens”. One colleague of mine who is a devout Christian told me the same. She has been told by her cousins that she may take offence to certain sections of the book. Same happened during “Da Vinci Code” and same happens with any book taking a different view on any religion out there. Why mere words create such a big furor because, all these are spread via word of mouth and sayings and couplets. By recording something on print or any other format, it goes against their very grain of sand of creation and existence. With more and more people following religions without understanding its essence and equal, if not more number becoming atheists or non-followers of any religion, fueled by population explosion, the arena is getting bigger and bigger. Some day it would eventually lead to a new crusade – a coalition of all religions - against the non-believers. And finally those who are left behind would be true believers – be of god or of science.
Comments
It depends on what religion means to an individual. If it is blind faith, then yes, it will conflict against rationality and sometimes with science. Man took to religion because of how frightening and vast his environment is and he needed some solace. As science keeps explaining and revealing many of what was originally unexplainable and frightening, it starts to conflict with blind belief.
But if your religion is to promote a set of values which are dear to you, then there is no conflict with science at all. I would argue that this is the true call of religion. A set of beliefs, practices and values that makes you a good human being. As a source of personal strength, a belief system is invaluable.
Personally, I think any ideology, be it religion or language or any principle, can stand the test of time, only by being dynamic and evolving with time. Look at English - how it is all encompassing and accomodating - it isn't hesitant to borrow vocabulary from Tamil, Sanskrit, Greek, Latin etc. While faith in a Religion is essential to keep people grounded, and derive strength from - the notion of Religion should be all encompassing. While we unearth and unravel mysteries of the Universe, Religion should accede and accomodate changes in understanding. Laws of Religion should be subjectable to change.
That said, I think, of all the several beings, God is the most misunderstood and understated by us, Humans. According to me, God is all encompassing, endearing someone/spirit. He has no form and takes no sides. He is just Him. The thought of God should provoke feelings of love, peace and happiness - but when we think of God, we almost think of stuff to ask, prayers to answer etc. I also think God shouldn't be feared - if we are driven by fear, we are not being our true selves. Rather, we should be driven by Love for Him/Her.
Thus, while Religion lays laws of life (and hence, instills fear), God lays the basis for strength and joy of life. And Religion IS NOT defined by God. They are entirely two different entities, what do you think?
Sorry for spamming your space, like crazy!