A significant amount of science is not understood by most
people inducing the skeptics. It is true that we cannot always remain skeptical
under all circumstances. Sometime we have to make a judgement to trust
something (like my decision to vaccinate my son for MMR when there was a huge
controversy over the MMR vaccine). But
does that mean, I have to trust a Swamiji when he/she ask me to sit in crossed
legged position and eat yogurt for a month?
Science is Open,
self-correcting and subject to scrutiny
First of all, scientific ideas were not born out of divine
exposures but mostly from lab experiments and logical analysis. If a Professor
is teaching Ohms law to his students, the fact that Ohms law was discovered,
debated to death, verified by experiments is an important consideration. On the
other hand religious ideas are not subject to debate. If you are a clever person
who finds Ohms law to be wrong, there is nothing stopping you from persuading
the scientist to accept your view. If you really use the scientific methodology
and prove that Ohms law is wrong, those scientists will grudgingly agree and
re-write the text book (I can’t see that happening!). Examples of such radial
changes exist in Science.
Scientific ideas are
universal.
There may be a difference between the way science is taught
depending on the abilities and skill of the teacher. But Ohms law is Ohms law
no matter who teaches this or in which language you are taught. On the other
hand, the interpretation of spiritual ideas is not universal. The Bhagavat Gita version
of ISCON is completely different to the version of Swami Vivekananda (and miles
away from the commentry of some of the self-claimed godmen).
Science has a system
in place to establish competency
I trust my doctor because I have reasonable evidence to believe
that he is qualified to practice medicine in Canada. It would be pointless
trying to argue with my doctor and demand that he provide proof that a particular
medicine works. It is
not quite the same when his holiness “Sri Sri Holy Infinity” says breathing
slowly will cure Alzhaimers disease! There are billions of spiritual gurus,
teachers etc. who declare themselves to be competent. There is no way of
verifying this. You have to take their
word for it. (And how do you measure one’s level of divinity?).
Science provides consistant, verifiable evidence (well, for the most part)
I trust electrical engineering, or science related to
electricity and magnetism, even though I may not fully understand the concept
of electricity. The fact that tiny electrons move along a copper wire and do
incredible things sounds like a fairy tale. But there is enough evidence to
trust these electrical engineering folks. They make light out of tungsten filament,
move large machines, rotate giant fans, etc. (even the high decibel speakers
used by religious folks to broadcast sermons are as a result of electrical engineering). The most important thing is that it is consistant. The application of science is univerisal. For example, if you switch a table fan, anyone will feel the wind blowing. Assuming it is in working condition, the fan should work for any one.
Spritual experiences however are mostly anectodal and are not universal. While certain Babas/Swamis seem to work magic on some people, for others, their tricks don't work. Astrologers say, you have to be destined to receive good predictions! i-phone will work whether you have good karma or bad karma (subject to the will of your service provider!)
There is compelling verifiable evidence for vast majority of scientific work. On the other hand, when a swamji says I am going to be born as a four legged Platypus because I haven't clocked enough positive Karma, it is hard is believe. The only way that I would know for sure is if I die- an experiment that I am not prepared to conduct at this age!
No matter how good
Science is, you still need to use your head
At what point, can we place faith (or I would like to call
it "reasonable trust") on something that we don't fully understand or
have compelling evidence? Why do I trust my doctor?
Why you can place a reasonable degree of trust in a
university professor’s teachings or advice from your doctor (even though you
may not comprehend their ideas), but not your local priest or spiritual guru?
Let us examine.
Science is Open,
self-correcting and subject to scrutiny
First of all, scientific ideas were not born out of divine
exposures but mostly from lab experiments and logical analysis. If a Professor
is teaching Ohms law to his students, the fact that Ohms law was discovered,
debated to death, verified by experiments is an important consideration. On the
other hand religious ideas are not subject to debate. If you are a clever person
who finds Ohms law to be wrong, there is nothing stopping you from persuading
the scientist to accept your view. If you really use the scientific methodology
and prove that Ohms law is wrong, those scientists will grudgingly agree and
re-write the text book (I can’t see that happening!). Examples of such radial
changes exist in Science.
The beauty of science is that it goes through an iterative
process -scientist debate, examine everything with a tooth pick, and then
establish facts, theories, laws etc. Sometimes they get it wrong. But some else
can and will eventually correct this. Everything is open for debate at any time
by anyone.
When was the last time we updated the Bible, Quran or Vedas?
They are set in Stone (literally!)
Of course, a large number of scientific theories have
already been through this process that it would be futile to debate them. So it
is worthwhile to consider them as "Reasonably true" and carry on. If
you want to call this as Faith, that is a matter of verbiage. It is not quite
the same as trusting your Priest when he says you are likely to go to hell and
get roasted in the oven at 1000 deg C because you missed your morning prayers!
Scientific ideas are
universal.
There may be a difference between the way science is taught
depending on the abilities and skill of the teacher. But Ohms law is Ohms law
no matter who teaches this or in which language you are taught. On the other
hand, the interpretation of spiritual ideas is not universal. The Bhagavat Gita version
of ISCON is completely different to the version of Swami Vivekananda (and miles
away from the commentry of some of the self-claimed godmen).
Science has a system
in place to establish competency
I trust my doctor because I have reasonable evidence to believe
that he is qualified to practice medicine in Canada. It would be pointless
trying to argue with my doctor and demand that he provide proof that a particular
medicine works. It is
not quite the same when his holiness “Sri Sri Holy Infinity” says breathing
slowly will cure Alzhaimers disease! There are billions of spiritual gurus,
teachers etc. who declare themselves to be competent. There is no way of
verifying this. You have to take their
word for it. (And how do you measure one’s level of divinity?).
Science provides consistant, verifiable evidence (well, for the most part)
I trust electrical engineering, or science related to
electricity and magnetism, even though I may not fully understand the concept
of electricity. The fact that tiny electrons move along a copper wire and do
incredible things sounds like a fairy tale. But there is enough evidence to
trust these electrical engineering folks. They make light out of tungsten filament,
move large machines, rotate giant fans, etc. (even the high decibel speakers
used by religious folks to broadcast sermons are as a result of electrical engineering). The most important thing is that it is consistant. The application of science is univerisal. For example, if you switch a table fan, anyone will feel the wind blowing. Assuming it is in working condition, the fan should work for any one.  |
| Animation by Naren Raj |
There is compelling verifiable evidence for vast majority of scientific work. On the other hand, when a swamji says I am going to be born as a four legged Platypus because I haven't clocked enough positive Karma, it is hard is believe. The only way that I would know for sure is if I die- an experiment that I am not prepared to conduct at this age!
Here is my final sermon!
No matter how good
Science is, you still need to use your head
A few months back my
doctor prescribed me an antibiotic for an infection. When I went to the
pharmacy to get this medicine, I found out that this drug was very expensive (over
$100). After a few minutes chit chat with my pharmacist, I learned that my doctor seem to have
prescribed a specific brand of drug that is expensive. There are other generic verities
of the same antibiotic family that are less expensive (costs around $30), and
would do the same job. So I went back to my doctor and politely discussed my
conversation with the pharmacist, and asked him if he would consider changing
the prescription. The doctor raised his eyebrows and said “In my 30 years of experience
as a doctor, this is the first time I have a request from my patient
to change the medicine”. He was a good sport and he changed the prescription. I saved $70!
So do I trust my doctor? Yes and No. End of the day you
still have to use your head and make a judgement.
Fundamental to the
idea of rational thinking is asking questions, evaluating the response and
making a judgement. In that process some time you may have to place a degree of
trust on someone or something.
