I’ve come across quite a few scientists who have become single dimensional… simply acolytes of measurement and willing to believe nothing unless it can be measured.
Some, like Richard Dawkins, are prepared to say categorically that
they KNOW religion is bunkum.
I think his attitude is quite unscientific. Where is his proof?
Some scientists appear to have CLOSED MINDS, inasmuch as they are only prepared to ‘accept’ an idea or phenomena if it can be PROVEN.
My view of science is the idea of eternal exploration… of being open to ANY idea as a proposition worthy of enquiry.
SO… perhaps we should reorganise our thinking into categories:
1. What is most likely to be true and to remain so.
2. What is most likely true unless we learn more.
3. What may be true, but we haven’t yet tested it carefully.
4. A whole heap of stuff that we have no idea if it’s true or not, but which may be either.
5. Some things we are fairly sure aren’t true but…
6 . Things which have been carefully tested and are almost certainly untrue.
Of course, not all scientists have closed minds, but there are enough for it to be a stumbling block to the view of science providing all the answers required to live life to its full potential.
I suppose, because scientists are human, there will be some for whom the certainty of science seems fitting, natural. At the other end of the spectrum will be adventurers who welcome the challenge of testing fixed ideas… although there are perhaps fewer of these intrepid folk than the world needs.
Science has gained dominion over us. We are not to believe something unless it can be measured and/or proven. Oh dear!!
Humanity is now in an era where science has overtaken religion as the prevailing paradigm. YET… despite many advances, we still require a more complete, more integrated way of looking at life.
We need awe. We need meaning. We need love. We need to belong. We need hope. We need answers to the troubling circumstances that distract us. Can science provide adequate answers for these questions… or solace… or peace?
Certainly not yet. Perhaps never.
What can we do?
Thought provoking – unlike Dawkins et al, encourages critical thinking using all human faculties.