Philosophy / Science

So where does science fit in all this? All of what has been covered to this point lands in the category of philosophy. The three questions that we ask about origin, purpose and destiny are philosophical in nature, and the worldview that we choose to answer these three questions is purely philosophical. Religion itself can also be considered philosophy, since the two are essentially mirrors of one another, for they both seek answers to these grandiose questions. In recent times the pursuit of philosophy, which was once the zenith of human reason, isn’t of much importance in the modern world. Philosophy has diminished while science has taken the lead in peoples thinking when making worldview decisions. As the writer and historian Will Durant put it, “Science seems always to advance, while philosophy seems always to lose ground.”

In modern times we have come to value science as the highest form of knowledge and in so doing we have divorced it from philosophy. As a consequence there is a great chasm that separates science and philosophy (and religion), and many passionately believe that the two should have nothing to do with each other. Philosophy and science are tough subjects to wrestle with because they engender much contention and spark heated debate. These pillars of civilization are like two ancient friends who, together once upheld all knowledge and wisdom, but over time they grew tired of one another, and began bickering about who was superior, and now they are stubborn archenemies. They were old friends in that they worked together to help us understand everything we possibly could about the universe. But definitions and methods caused confusion and derision, which lead to enmity.

We have inherited this enmity and perpetuate this ill-conceived incongruity. For the modern skeptical nontheist, philosophical questions cannot be subject to scientific method, and for the modern skeptical theist there is a fear that science will somehow dislodge ones worldview or faith in God. For skeptics of both camps this topic is a virtual battlefield. And as with most wars, fear and pride are the reasons for the conflict. If one removes fear and pride there is no conflict between the two, but actually a harmony or completeness. This is ultimately a balance between knowledge and wisdom, and nature and creator.

Let us take a look at the two by starting with some definitions. The word “philosophy” comes from the Greek φιλοσοφία (philosophia), which literally means “love of wisdom”. Philosophy is the oldest form of systematic, scholarly inquiry, and its disciplines are concerned with the study of the truths or principles underlying all knowledge, being, and reality. Thus, philosophy has been the means by which we explain things like origin, meaning and destiny. In ancient times philosophy included natural philosophy, which was the beginning of the sciences. Therefore, science owes its beginning and vocation to philosophy. Will Durant rightly said that philosophy is the front trench in the siege of truth and science is the captured territory. Therefore, every science begins as philosophy. As for the word “science”, this comes from Latin scientia, which means “knowledge”. Concealed in their names you clearly see purpose and goal of these two fields. Philosophy=the pursuit of wisdom, science=the pursuit of knowledge.

So what is wisdom and knowledge? Wisdom can be understood as the deep realization or comprehensive of what is true and right. According to Plato, wisdom is a combination of virtue, knowledge, and self examination. Centuries later, this definition would be embraced by theologians, and was amended to include a spiritual outlook on the universe. According to St. Gregory of Sinai, “the philosopher is one who perceives in created things their spiritual cause.” Knowledge, on the other hand can be understood as facts, data, and information. Knowledge is concerned with that which is empirical. On this St. Augustine said that, “to wisdom belongs the intellectual apprehension of things eternal; to knowledge, the rational apprehension of things temporal.”

Throughout history the pursuit of knowledge and wisdom (philosophy and science) were not only viewed as compatible, they were inseparable—they were natural extensions of one another. This was due in part because the scope of philosophy was limitless and science was not restricted to materialistic and natural pursuits. It was understood that, it is where science leaves off that all philosophy begins. This united vision of the humanities continued through Classical Antiquity and into the Middle Ages. A look at history reveals that most of the pioneers of science were often philosophers and theologians. In many cases philosophy and religion were the primary motivators and instigators of science.

So how can science and religion be harmonized? How can these two very different disciplines, which vary in scope and study, enjoy a mutual respect and even enhance each other? In harmonizing the two we first must establish definitions. Religion is the knowledge of the spiritual or metaphysical, and science is the knowledge of the natural or physical world. As Einstein said, “Both churches and universities — insofar as they live up to their true function — serve the ennoblement of the individual.”[8] Therefore religion must be true to the discipline of its philosophy just as science must adhere to its discipline of scientific method, and should not dabble in speculation. If both stick to the sphere of their competences, religion and science will never be in conflict. If contradictions occur this indicates that either science or religion has betrayed its principles and has become pseudo-science or pseudo-religion.

When looking back at history and the origins of the deterioration of the relationship between science and religion we can see what started the enmity. I propose that it started in the west and occurred when western religion traded reason for mysticism. A broad look at history would indicate that the result of this change in religious attitude was made glaringly obvious in the 17th century. If it were possible to pinpoint a moment in history, I would venture to say that it began with the trial of astronomer and physicist, Galileo Galilei (†1642). At the time western religious doctrine claimed that the earth was at the center of the universe. Galileo’s research in astronomy led him to believe that the sun was at the center of the universe, an idea put forth earlier by Nicolaus Copernicus (†1543). Galileo rocked the Roman Catholic Church with his insistence on this idea, and the Church lashed back. This is one of the great examples of religion stepping out of the sphere of its competency.

As a professed Roman Catholic, Galileo was at odds with his own religion, or rather Church authority that went out on a limb by dabbling in science as doctrine. During this period Galileo wrote in a letter: “I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree: ‘The intention of the Holy Spirit is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heavens go.’” This statement sums up the different rolls science and religion play in our lives. In the same letter Galileo said:

“I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with senses, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use and by some other means to give us knowledge which we can attain by them. ”

Galileo clearly desired a world where God and science could inform each other and coexist. Seeing this potential completely deteriorate was probably his greatest suffering. In another letter he espoused views similar to that of Greek classical school of philosophy. In discussing the order that was evident in the universe he said, “I suppose the parts of the universe to be in the best arrangement, so that none is out of its place, which is to say that Nature and God have perfectly arranged their structure.” In the end the Roman Church was flat wrong about how this structure was arranged, and Galileo was right.

At about the same time as Galileo’s trial, an English scientist and philosopher saw harmony between science and religion. Sir Francis Bacon (†1626), pioneer of scientific method as we know it today, was often thought of as an atheist. However, he seemed to retain a conviction that all things trace back to deity. In grappling with science and religion he said:

“while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them, confederate and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity.”

Blaise Pascal (†1662), the French philosopher and scientist was profoundly committed to his beliefs in God and was at the same time a renowned scientist. Pascal’s collection of unfinished notes and essays called Pensées (thoughts), which are filled with short vignettes that plumbed the depths of philosophy and theology, offer insight into reason and faith. One of these entries is known as Pascal’s Wager. Here Pascal puts forth an argument for belief in God which is essentially daring the agnostic or skeptic to “give it a try”, so to speak, because you can’t lose:

“Belief is a wise wager. Granted that faith cannot be proved, what harm will come to you if you gamble on its truth and it proves false? If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing. Wager, then, without hesitation, that He exists.”

For Sir Isaac Newton (†1729), preeminent mathematician and physicist in the history of science, the proof of God’s existence was in his thumb. On this he said: “In the absence of any other proof, the thumb alone would convince me of God's existence”. We might assume that this was in reference to the complex biology that is behind this little feat of engineering. He might even be referring to how extraordinarily useful the opposable thumb is part of the hand, which is the greatest organic tool the world has ever seen. Regardless, Isaac Newton was very outspoken in his worldview that included both God and science. His more notable quote on this is in reference the solar system and the order of the universe:

“The most beautiful system of the Sun, Planets and Comets could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent being. All variety of created objects which represent order and Life in the Universe could happen only by the willful reasoning of its original Creator, whom I call the Lord God.”

If we fast forward from the 17th century to modern times we come across one of the most famous scientists and physicists or all time. His disheveled hair and broad mustache are iconic and synonymous with the science and genius. It was Elbert Einstein who gave us one of the more famous quotes on the matter: “Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.” He was known to be outspoken in his view that God is self evident in the universe, the governing principles, and the force of life and motion therein. He referred to this governing force or principle as the “spirit manifest in the laws of the universe”, and has said that he believed in a “God who reveals Himself in the harmony of all that exists.” When asked if he was religious, Einstein replied:

"Yes, you can call it that. Try and penetrate with our limited means the secrets of nature and you will find that, behind all the discernible laws and connections, there remains something subtle, intangible and inexplicable. Veneration for this force beyond anything that we can comprehend is my religion. To that extent I am, in fact, religious."

If foremost scientists can have a worldview that includes philosophy and science, wisdom and knowledge, reason and religion, what might one of the world’s religious leaders say on the matter? The late Pope John Paul II echoed ancient sentiments when he said, “Science can purify religion from error and superstition; religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes. Each can draw the other into a wider world, a world in which both can flourish.” This integrated approach was how the early Christian thinkers looked at it. Many of these early Christian theologians were educated in the sciences and so called pagan philosophy of the Greeks, and they saw no conflict with these studies and their worldview.

It is my belief that inside of you there is both a scientist and a philosopher. From childhood there has always been a part of you that is eager to know, and a part that is wise and ponders purpose. In fact, both are natural to the human experience. So the question is: which one will take precedence in your worldview? For the goals of purpose, love and happiness, I urge you to consider placing wisdom before knowledge. Wisdom, with her disposition of virtue and self examination, provide a noble and tempered context for knowledge. Facts cannot know love and compassion, but wisdom can. An accumulation of interesting information will never provide you with purpose and happiness, but philosophy can. One of the more interesting women thinkers of the modern era, the French philosopher and mystic Simone Weil, boldly said that, “A science which does not bring us nearer to God is worthless”. This statement bravely challenges the modern way of thinking, which regards science as the highest human activity. Simone’s view puts science in place that is lower than philosophy and religion. Albert Einstein seemed to hold a similar view:

“Our time is distinguished by wonderful achievements in the fields of scientific understanding and the technical application of those insights. Who would not be cheered by this? But let us not forget that knowledge and skills alone cannot lead humanity to a happy and dignified life. Humanity has every reason to place the proclaimers of high moral standards and values above the discoverers of objective truth. What humanity owes to personalities like Buddha, Moses, and Jesus ranks for me higher than all the achievements of the inquiring and constructive mind… I believe in intuition and inspiration. Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited, whereas imagination embraces the entire world...”

When talking about finding harmony between your knowing self and your virtuous self, we are expressly talking about the mind and heart—two faculties of your soul or inner most self. The mind is operating through reason and your heart is sensing, feeling and understanding. This is what it looks like when the heart leads the mind: wisdom, virtue, truth and self examination lead one to a noble discovery and use of knowledge. With the two in proper harmony you can approach the greater goals: self knowledge and divine wisdom.