Yesterday, in the context
of writing about Galileo, I explored a few ideas about free thought. This
morning, when browsing through some unfinished essays, I found the following
fragment, which seems substantial enough to publish on its own. I wrote this a
few years back in response to an online discussion about how religion consists
merely of stories but relies on the ability (?) of people to accept the stories
as real.
I
think that both "believing" and "story-telling" can be
understood as ways of "explaining." Humans have the intelligence and ability
to question, to wonder, to seek the answer to "why." Myths and
stories (and that includes religion, of course) are old-fashioned ways of
perceiving and describing our world and its origins, especially the parts of it
that we didn't (or still don't) understand. Modern thinkers rely on science and
reason to explain and describe what we know about the world, just as we use
science and reason to pursue the answers to "why" and
"how." Modern thinkers are able to see religion, myth, narrative,
etc., as archaic means of explanation. Modern thinkers are comfortable with not
knowing, and their pursuit of real knowledge is a pleasure. Archaic thinkers
are afraid of the unknown, so they continue to rely on old stories that contain
"answers" rather than accept the still-questing, still-learning,
modern, wondering human mind.
----
It
always amazes me that atheists, particularly scientists, are so often branded
as lacking a sense of wonder about the world. I see it as precisely opposite,
especially with scientists (of which I am not one): Scientists are motivated by
wonder, by love of the real world, by a desire to understand it utterly,
because they find it beautiful and endlessly fascinating. I may be projecting my
own love for our beautiful and endlessly fascinating world, but that's how it
has always seemed to me.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.