Godless

Originally I was going to write my blog post on the origin of written languages. I gathered quotes from Plato and modern anthropologists. I read articles and Wikipedia entries. I even found a short clip geared towards children that explored the concept in a simple and concise manner, but when I sat down to write, nothing came out. I couldn’t form a single coherent sentence because my mind was elsewhere. That’s when I realized that I needed to express the ideas flying around in my head, so I broke down and started to write on the sophic nature of science.

We have often heard of the old debate: “Science vs. Religion”. I believe that everybody should have a healthy mix of the two in order to be a sane human being, BUT I also believe that science is necessarily “godless.”

Let me explain. Science attempts to explain the world around us in very logical terms, citing natural laws and proposing mechanisms by which things happen. Scientists observe behaviors by experiment and then come up with theories which both explain their results and provide a way to predict future outcomes. These models have proved themselves extremely useful in allowing people to harness natural processes to accomplish supernatural feats. A profound understanding of the body has allowed the development of medicines and surgical procedures that have allowed us to live much longer than the people of the past. Look around! Most things that you take for granted (microwaves, cars, cell phones, computers, modern medicine, etc.) would seem like miracles for those who lived just a few hundred years ago. Although they appear to be supernatural accomplishments, all can be understood with just a few logical explanations.

Sometimes these models can be imperfect (or sometimes just completely wrong!), but all the same they provide insight that cannot be gathered any other way. Perhaps it is impossible to discover the “truth,” but we can definitely get close enough. In his article we discussed in class, Hugh Nibley commented on the shortcomings of the sophic mindset, stating that science claimed to be able to explain everything, when in reality, our understanding is limited and incomplete in all likelihood. While that is true, I do not find it to be a debilitating weakness like Nibley did. In fact, I find it to be science’s greatest strength.

Try try again

Science never gives up. If a current theory fails to accurately portray reality, then scientists simply propose a new theory that fits. Although the new theory is most likely going to be proven wrong in the future, for now it allows us make predictions that fairly accurately describe the real world. For example, Aristotle believed that heavier objects fell faster than lighter objects. Galileo proved that objects fall at the same rate, but was unable to describe the motion of the planets. Newton came along and proposed laws of motion, showing that gravity exists between any two objects, just that the earth is so massive that it is difficult to observe this attraction between other objects. Einstein later showed Newton’s theories to be insufficient and invented the idea of space-time curvature. To this day, scientists are working to better understand “gravity” and its physical laws. Although the “truth” is not yet completely understood, what we know now is enough to permit us to design skyscrapers, rollercoasters and space shuttles. It really doesn’t matter if the sophics are “right” or not!

By definition, science is godless. Science demands physical proof and cannot accept that which cannot be proven by experiment and reason. Lucky for us! If scientists could just throw up their hands and say “only God knows!” then how would we ever have developed all of the technology that we have now?

I’m not saying that knowledge gained from above is worthless. As a Mormon, I find divine guidance to be invaluable! There must be the proper balance of the sophic (science and reason) and the mantic (divinely given knowledge) in order for one to reach his potential, but they belong to different spheres. While there is overlap in our personal lives, I maintain my stance that science is necessarily godless and religion must often disregard the conclusions of the scientific world. Both are important in and of themselves, but must also be mutually exclusive.

For me, the struggle is no longer “Science vs. Religion,” but rather learning to balance the sophic and the mantic sources of knowledge in my life.