It is refreshing to hear a discussion of sincere agnostics discuss the prospects of spirituality and God in light of a scientific orientation. If you have the time definitely watch it:
http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/20509?in=00:00&out=55:46
I think for Baha'i's who start with a spiritual orientation, it is easy to accept science as a welcome complement. We have certain assumptions that make them easily compatible.
I am one of those people. I have always had an intuitive feeling about spirituality; it has always seemed second nature. So then, the language I used is couched in the assumption of spiritual reality, even in a scientific discussion.
I realize more now that many people do not contain any such intuition naturally. Nothing is assumed, and for them discussing spirituality with a believer of any religion can be very frustrating, because the language is different. The word "spirituality" is frustrating because it contains a metaphysical assumption, even before the discussion starts. To them "spirituality" is just a fancy word for moral inspiration predicated upon a belief in eternal purpose and accountability, the predisposition of which can be explained by biological and cultural evolution. How much more frustrating for somebody like a Baha'i to claim harmony of science and religion so easily, while using sloppy and imprecise language to justify it.
Part of the Baha'i belief in "progressive revelation" is that we must always reinterpret and refine our beliefs based upon evolving evolutionary capacity and scientific development. It is a pursuit that I hope to keep exploring and writing about in more detail. That is, wiping away the baggage of popular interpretation of the Baha'i writings, and understanding them again in a more detached and analytical manner. Of course this aproach has its limits; subjectivity and experience is indespensible to making any logical value judgement. And really in the end it is a matter of faith either for or against belief. In any case, I believe that faith in its true form, is the opposite of delusion.
1 comment:
I found the comments on Facebook interesting so I thought I would repost them on this blog
Rory Plaire at 1:32am June 24
This is why I find computer science so helpful at addressing concerns of imprecision: it is clear from those studies that language has very clear limits at describing reality, and that there are truths which will never be able to be proven or derived yet remain truths. This itself is actually proven quite rigorously. So, then, it can be seen that rejecting truths due to the inability to prove them you are just as erroneous as accepting them without a method of rigorous justification from a quantitative standpoint. If one disagrees, it's because one needed to set up a value system which judges that unprovable truths are less valuable than provable ones within the system of description under consideration. From here you can show how this value system is essentially a set of consistent beliefs which are held to be true without question... which is to say, a religion.
Jason Snyder at 8:51am June 24
Rory,
But who holds the standard for truth? We have a standard based upon the Baha'i writings, but why then should we expect anybody else to accept them. Just based on intuition alone? If a religion gains enough acceptance, does that mean it is the truth?
I am curious which truths are found to be improvable (meaning they will never be proven, not in million years). I would venture to say that most experience that people can have, ie spiritual awakening/growth/experience, IS explainable by evolutionary biologists and neuroscientists. But then the question becomes, is there more to life than explanation. That is what I am looking for. What is the meaning of human consciousness? Can somebody really argue on philosophical grounds that the virtues/capacity for unconditional love, forgiveness, patience ISN'T an eternal condition which existed before the human vessal evolved to the point that it could manifest it? Was Plato wrong to suggest that there are no ideals in the universe?
Aniseh Sjona Bro at 12:24pm June 24
i will post this on my dad's fb.. I think he will find it interesting...
Warren Snyder at 7:05pm June 24
could consciousness, like the universe, be constantly expanding, infinite and eternal.? If so, there is never an end to new knowledge and understanding. That is a humbling thought.
Jason Snyder at 7:55pm June 24
Dad: Humbling indeed!
Marilyn McGettigan at 10:27pm June 24
I'm interested in how spirituality becomes intuitive and second nature to someone. Is it a moment of epiphany, is it a recognition of something beyond you? When did you first notice that Jason? To me perhaps it was through the power of a prayer, when my heart opened up and something else else played a tune on my lute strings. It was a tune that I recognized, but it is taking years to years to unfold. I wish that I wasn't so much much in the material world so that the tune would strenthen and expand on it's original potential.
Post a Comment