We note that during the conversation on God Belief, there
may be rare sharp statement by either side, but the underlying message is to reach
an accord to ensure avoiding the harm due to extremism on either side. Here one
point is worth noting that the concepts such as God, Religion or Science and
Technology are not at any fault but the wrong attitude of its use by certain
people at the helm of affairs is the reason for creating the harm.
Re conciliatory approach to the accord is seen reflected
in the following statements from the conversation.
The polemics (controversies) of believers show an
ignorance of science, what it offers to improve life, and the polemics of
fundamentalist atheists ignore the wisdom found in religious texts. Both seem
threatened by diversity and wish to erase any doubt under a blanket of blind
belief.
It is true, of course, that organized religions do not
point to a single, coherent view of the nature of God. But to reject God
because of the admitted self-contradictions and logical failings of organized
religion would be like rejecting physics because of the inherent contradictions
of quantum theory and general relativity...
You must find a science- friendly, science-compatible
God. First, try the pantheon (a temple dedicated
to all the
gods.) of available Creators. Inspect
thoroughly. If none fits the bill, invent one.
Many eminent practitioners of science have successfully
persuaded themselves that there is no logical contradiction between faith and
belief by finding a suitable God, or by clothing traditional God appropriately.
The schism (division or disunion or
split) between science and religion can be healed, but it will require a slow
evolution from a supernatural, theistic God to a new sense of a fully natural
God as our chosen symbol for the ceaseless creativity in the natural universe.
This healing may also require a transformation of science to a new scientific worldview
with a place for the ceaseless creativity in the universe that we can call God.
This sentiment of the thinkers pronounced through an august
discussion organized by Templeton Foundation in the first decade of the 21st
century was sensed by an Indian prophetic thinker Swami Vijnananand about 60
years ahead. He has given an extensive plan of action for the truce between
science and religion in his book, GOD RECONSIDERED (Feb. 1962), with rational definition
of God, with which all faiths, including Marxists, keep in peace.
GOD RECONSIDERED
Let us try to understand the dictionary meanings of the
terms “subjective” and “objective”
Subjective (adjective)
- existing in the mind;
belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of
thought).
- Pertaining to or
characteristic of an individual; personal; individual: a subjective evaluation.
- placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes,
opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric.
- Philosophy. Relating to or of the nature of
an object as it is known in the mind as distinct from a thing in itself.
- relating to properties or specific conditions of the mind as
distinguished from general or universal experience.
Objective (adjective)
- Not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations,
or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective
opinion.
- Intent upon or dealing with
things external to the mind rather than with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book.
- being the object of perception or thought; belonging to
the object of thought rather than to the thinking
subject.
- of or pertaining to
something that can be known, or to something that
is an object or a part of an object; existing independent of
thought or
an observer as part of reality.
To discover Truth, the endeavor of Humanity
Both Science and Religion endeavor to discover the ultimate
Truth. This should be the obvious aim of both because the Truth can bring about
the real welfare of humanity. Whether it is science or religion, the search
would be carried out by a person. In other words to reach the Truth (objective
reality), the means is a person (i.e. subject). While ‘objectivity’ is the
target, 100% elimination of subjectivity by any person is impossible. Therefore
to reach the Truth the theists and atheists will have to look for combining the
objectivity and subjectivity optimally. A subject i.e. a person cannot totally eliminate
subjectivity. He / She can endeavor to minimize it. That means to the extent a
person can work with detached mind, the outcome can be considered as a rational
or optimally objective, nearing Truth.
Truth defined.
With the above explanation at the back-ground, Rev. Swami
Vijnananand defined Truth as follows. (Ref page 179, on book “GOD RECONSIDERED”)
In spite of all pretenses man knows the truth and so God.
Without accepting a bait of another controversy on the nature of truth, the
seeker can gain his point restricting to definition of Truth in this way:
Truth is
an objective reality, subjectively known, told with a detached mind.
It may be accepted on a simple ground that the definition is
self-explanatory.
All faiths, including Marxism, lend hand to truth. A
commoner on the lowest rung of the ladder is conscious of its all-embracing
validity.
At the opening page of the book author describes GOD
God is not just, because he is not Unjust
God is not Kind, as he is not Cruel.
He does not bless, since He does not curse.
He is the First Cause in sense an effect is produced,
when He is abandoned.
God dwells in an idol as also in the hammer that breaks
it
He doesn't live in the blind craving or in hate for Him.
Highlights of the book “GOD RECONSIDERED”, a blood-less
revolution
Science accepts God on terms. Eleven religions and radical
philosophies point out how kernel of their doctrines have forestalled these
terms and have incorporated spirit of their requirements in respective
hypotheses. Get acquainted with rational definition of God, with which all
faiths, including Marxists, keep in peace. Long - awaited truce between science
and dogma is reached in this work. Every page reveals logic, study and
synthesis.
Here are some flashes, selected at random.
A rationalist accepts religion, not because of any dogma;
but because it can be reconciled with the spirit or essence of science.
Therefore, in case an assertion in religious doctrine supporting reason stands
refuted in some other or in the same text, it is for the dogmatic to explain
the odd situation. It is not the responsibility of the open-minded who shares belief
in religions only because of (and to the limit of) their rational
character." (Point VIII chapter two.)
Science, equally like religion, is bewitched by confounding
contradictions; so much so that materialist scientists are inclined to
formulate Law of contradiction itself. (Point 3, chapter 9)
A positive, constructive approach is the urgent requirement,
lest God himself should change over to the so called materialist. After all,
God too wants to be in good company. (Concluding sentence, chapter 3)
Instead of pronouncing high ideals and insulting them by
non-observance, new way philosophy paves the way to slow practice without
violating tenets of science as well as religions. (Point 2F, appendix B)
Seer’s song
Employing the logical intelligence of Science, and service
based dedication of Religion, for the healthy life for a common person, Swami
Vijnananand in his poem titled ‘Extremes meet’ says:
“Speak Truth’ said religions;
From it science was solace.
‘Order please’ said science so
Behold the message. Undo wrong,
Science and religions sing the same song”.
Vijay R. Joshi.
No comments:
Post a Comment