Comments on: The Science of Spirituality http://lofitribe.com/the-science-of-spirituality/ A compendium of writing concerning progressive community, literature, culture and faith by Shawn Anthony. Wed, 17 Mar 2010 16:57:37 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Dave GM http://lofitribe.com/the-science-of-spirituality/#comment-23833 Dave GM Thu, 20 Aug 2009 00:04:03 +0000 http://www.lofitribe.com/?p=3511#comment-23833 I agree with you sincerely - the Divine as revealed by the natural is a beautiful thing. One should not reject science, as you said, but should use it for what it is useful for - dealing with the observable, natural world around us. Preach it, brother! I agree with you sincerely – the Divine as revealed by the natural is a beautiful thing. One should not reject science, as you said, but should use it for what it is useful for – dealing with the observable, natural world around us.

Preach it, brother!

]]> By: Shawn Anthony http://lofitribe.com/the-science-of-spirituality/#comment-23823 Shawn Anthony Wed, 19 Aug 2009 18:30:36 +0000 http://www.lofitribe.com/?p=3511#comment-23823 I share your concern, Dave. Science has its limits, for sure. I always temper scientific knowledge with divinity. For example, we know how it rains, but still have no idea why it rains. Does that make sense? We may be able to point to a part of the brain and say, "That's where love comes from," so to speak, but we still can't answer the question of why we love. Furthermore, when I feel love, the last thing on my mind is the chemical processes that are involved! A guy like Richard Dawkins, who is a great biologist, obviously, tends to reduce the totality of the human experience to chemical processes. I think that would be a rather drab existence. I agree with you. Science has its limits. That said, I do think it can also reveal flashes of divinity that are simply awe inspiring and non-existent in expressions of faith that fear or avoid science completely because of fear. I love the whole "Ghost in the Machine" concept. I have an oil painting I did a few years back that is called "The Ghost in the Machine." My wife thinks it (my paining) is frightening and forced me to put it in the attic. I suppose it is! :) I share your concern, Dave. Science has its limits, for sure. I always temper scientific knowledge with divinity. For example, we know how it rains, but still have no idea why it rains. Does that make sense? We may be able to point to a part of the brain and say, “That’s where love comes from,” so to speak, but we still can’t answer the question of why we love. Furthermore, when I feel love, the last thing on my mind is the chemical processes that are involved! A guy like Richard Dawkins, who is a great biologist, obviously, tends to reduce the totality of the human experience to chemical processes. I think that would be a rather drab existence.

I agree with you. Science has its limits.

That said, I do think it can also reveal flashes of divinity that are simply awe inspiring and non-existent in expressions of faith that fear or avoid science completely because of fear.

I love the whole “Ghost in the Machine” concept. I have an oil painting I did a few years back that is called “The Ghost in the Machine.” My wife thinks it (my paining) is frightening and forced me to put it in the attic. I suppose it is! :)

]]> By: Dave GM http://lofitribe.com/the-science-of-spirituality/#comment-23822 Dave GM Wed, 19 Aug 2009 18:21:17 +0000 http://www.lofitribe.com/?p=3511#comment-23822 This is an interesting question - I had a philosophy course where we talked about this, specifically in connection to Descartes' "problem of the mind and body" and Gilbert Ryle's response in "The Ghost in the Machine". I won't pretend to be a biologist, but it seems to make sense that our brain would be wired this way - your analysis makes perfect sense. Either we made up God because our brains evolved that way, or else our brains are that way because God wanted us to be able to conceive of Him, etc. Nicely put, Shawn. The only real concern here is that many seem to expect science to be able to answer every question of human existence, while in fact it is only a useful tool in a toolbox that also contains other methods. So long as we and others remember that, this is a great study. This is an interesting question – I had a philosophy course where we talked about this, specifically in connection to Descartes’ “problem of the mind and body” and Gilbert Ryle’s response in “The Ghost in the Machine”.

I won’t pretend to be a biologist, but it seems to make sense that our brain would be wired this way – your analysis makes perfect sense. Either we made up God because our brains evolved that way, or else our brains are that way because God wanted us to be able to conceive of Him, etc. Nicely put, Shawn.

The only real concern here is that many seem to expect science to be able to answer every question of human existence, while in fact it is only a useful tool in a toolbox that also contains other methods. So long as we and others remember that, this is a great study.

]]>