I hate reading books like this because I like my religion and I like my science but I hate trying to figure out all of the possible places where they may or may not contradict each other. My brain starts trying to conceive the next great General Theory until my gray matter starts to melt down. My thoughts are more tangential to what the book said, and I hope even those that didn't read the book will feel free to chime in.
1. Science is wrong! - What we know about science now will most likely (barring an apocalypse) look pretty silly compared to what we know about science 100 years from now. So much of what we "know" according to the author of the book and scientists in general are extrapolations from tiny bits of information. They are highly sensible, very well reasoned extrapolations, but they are extrapolations nonetheless. As a statistician, I hate extrapolating.
The Big Bang Theory and the Theory of Evolution sound great, and I think they explain a lot about our expanding universe and the variety of species. As I don't believe that God works by magic but by science I don't completely understand yet, I prefer scientific explanations over magical explanations.
Still, these theories don't offer predictive power. Evolutionists haven't predicted (successfully) X-men or Kevin Costner with gills. Cosmologists haven't had to predict another bigger bang. Explanations of the past are a lot easier than predictions of the future, mostly because the full truth is more complicated than simple explanations. That's why I stopped being a psychology major and became a stats major. Psychologists can only predict the past, while statisticians can at least give you a probability of predicting the future.
I feel like the crazy, anti-science climate-change denier even typing that last paragraph. Look, I believe the earth is really, really old, etc., I just think there's room for skepticism and that we don't know as much as we sometimes think we know.
Now, about being wrong, I heard once something like this, "The following statements about the shape of the earth are both wrong:
1. The earth is flat.
2. The earth is round like a ball.
However, it is absurd to think that they are both equally wrong."
While I say that science is wrong, I am not at all beginning to suggest that we ignore science and all of the progress we have made. Scientists recognize the incompleteness of their work. Science is still very useful (a point I'll come back to) even when it is wrong.
2. My ill-fated quest to be right.
There was a short period in my life when I got really into politics. I studied the issues feverishly until I was convinced that I knew the 'right' position on every issue. This lasted approximately until the next election, when the person I voted for was not elected and realized that the world doesn't much care what I think is right. I didn't so much care about the election as want some sort of validation that my way of thinking was the right way.
If we assume that there is a right choice in politics (debatable), then most of the country has voted for the wrong person at some point in their life. It happens. We don't have all of the information and we make poor choices. I'm sure my kids will tell me some day all the things I did wrong as a father. I'll have too many kids or not enough. I'll send them to the wrong elementary school or college. If I get one right, it will inevitably ruin the next kid. The internets are full of articles telling me "You're doing it wrong..."
No one believes they're perfect, but we all believe that we're right much more than we're wrong. We have to believe that. Yet, there are so many religions, so many cultural differences in raising children, so many different circumstances and perspectives. If there is a right way to do things, then the odds are that we (and most of the rest of the world) are doing things wrong. Great historical figures who changed the world often did things wrong, and modern historians find their weaknesses (Jefferson had slaves?, Roosevelt believed in Eugenics?).
Personally, I feel confident that I married the right person for me. However, in theory we may not all make the optimal or 'right' nuptial decision, but there comes a point where you have to stop worrying about if the person you married was the absolute optimal choice, given your available options, timing, etc.. You just enjoy the life and marriage you have. Maybe you could have been 3% happier if you'd chosen someone else, but you'll certainly be 15% less happier if you keep worrying about it all the time and ruin what you have.
Not everything I do will be right, and that's OK. I can still be happy and make the world a better place.
3. "All models are wrong but some are useful."
Once I get past my overzealous drive to know which side is right and which side is wrong, I find a lot more peace in analyzing the science and religion dilemma.
Is Mormonism as I know it wrong? Almost certainly. Mormonism is a fluid religion. Early converts didn't know about the temple. The temple ceremony has changed. There are surely revelations coming that we don't know anything about. My religious beliefs are probably wrong, but for me, they are useful. I love the tradition, culture and community. I love serving and the selfless examples I see at church. I love that Mormonism embraces science (See the BYU magazine article encouraging everyone to become scientists) and encourages all truth. I love the peaceful feelings of the spirit that come with worship.
The God that the author argued for, The God of the Interstices, as Peter put it, isn't very useful. This God doesn't explain anything, doesn't provide hope or inspire worship. What's the point in believing in this type of God? I'd rather be an atheist than believe in a God of the Interstices. I can at least see the usefulness of being atheist.
In conclusion, I find there is a lot of useful truth in science and a lot of useful truth in my religion. I can't imagine the changes that will take place in science and religion over the next 100 years. My opinions and views of the world have changed immensely since freshman year at BYU, and I'm sure they'll continue to change. Still, I wouldn't give up those freshman year experiences for anything. I will keep growing and learning, but whatever is wrong about my current beliefs doesn't invalidate the experiences I have and the happiness I currently experience. So while I wait for science and religion to clarify the parts that are fuzzy for me, I'll continue to seek for knowledge, truth, beauty, and all that is good.
PS I liked the author's discussion of infinity and how it gets used to prove everything. I've never liked the monkeys/typewriters/Hamlet theory.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment