The more you know, the more you know you don’t really know at all. Except if you’re a scientist, in which case you arbitrarily dismiss everything that can’t be measured, tested and experimented. Until, that is, you find a way to experiment on the subject or you write a paper expounding millennia-old tenets as new and shocking discoveries.
While plenty of scientists and pseudo-scientists protest (too much), I view science as just another religion. Yes, it pretends to rely on logic and on empirical fact – i.e., by direct observation. Sounds reasonable, doesn’t it? Careful research carefully documented and results that can be achieved over and over again, proven by reaching the same outcome by different people.
That’s the ideal.
The reality is that science is as closed-minded as the Spanish inquisition, just less directly vicious to its detractors. I am all for repeatable experiments and responsible testing, don’t get me wrong. I just think there are aspects of life – like, for instance, the very fact that you and I get this whole communications thing – which sort of skirt the Bunsen burner a little. We know when things are alive. Mostly. Except when people are brain dead, for example. Are the brain dead truly dead, the mechanics of their bodies irrelevant to the departure of what makes them human? How about a seed? Is a seed alive before germinating? Is it dead? Is there a middle ground between the two, a razor’s edge holding the potential for life but still shy of achieving it?
One of the latest scientific theories is that the earth is alive. Yes, I mean the world, the oceans, the molten core and the rocks and water and everything else we know (and more than a little we don’t know). Lest you scoff that this is either an old April Fool’s joke or something gleaned from just another New Age site, au contraire. This is an excerpt from the article on Science Daily:
Earth is alive, asserts a revolutionary scientific theory of life emerging from Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine. The trans-disciplinary theory demonstrates that purportedly inanimate, non-living objects — for example, planets, water, proteins, and DNA — are animate, that is, alive.
Read the full article here.
Radical assertion? Only in science. Countless religions have long held that our planet and every rock and drop of water is alive. Most Native American cultures treat the world as a living thing, as do Pagans. So whether or not it can be called radical – scientifically speaking, definitely so. New concept, though? Hardly.
My point is that no matter how empirical science attempts to be, sooner or later Dr. Bullshit has to acknowledge things aren’t quite that simple.
I’m just sayin’.
Author Rupert Sheldrake is calling science’s bluff. Like me, he’s asking scientists to recognize the simple facts that there are more things on heaven and earth than man can… well, you get it. Sheldrake’s book, The Science Delusion, puts it point blank: science doesn’t have all the answers.