It changed the tenor of some of our conversations about what a human being can and should be.
I have had times in my life when I have moved toward an agnostic or atheistic view the world. Even so, as I have reached middle-age, I am less comfortable with those points of view.
As I thought about this change in my life and the conflicts that it creates for scientists, I struggled to explain to my son why he, as a budding scientist, should take religion seriously.
I have always been impressed with the book of Job. While the set up for the story is a battle between God and his adversary, the real poignancy of the story is how Job handles stresses put on him.
As a humble man, he weathers the quite literal storms that he faces. To me, this ability to handle problems is one of the great strengths of religion.
Every person in life will face stresses and strains. What makes a humble person great is his ability to handle those stresses and strains while not losing his focus on what is important in his life.
In an ever competitive world of science, this ability to handle stress and maintain focus is paramount for a great scientist.
A great scientist also needs to be able to use that focus in order to work logically through problems. The most logical and efficient people that I have ever met take big problems and break them down into ever smaller parts. Only when they have mastered the smallest detail do they move forward with their project. The accumulative affect of this detail is the ability to move a project forward with great efficiency toward a very large vision. Most importantly, when the project moves forward, it needs to be rewritten or reorganized far less than a project done in bigger leaps.
In my study of great thinkers like Einstein or Newton, there's a great deal of emphasis on slow, small, and methodical analysis. The world sees the great leap forward, but the scientist works quietly on the small steps. His announcement of his new theory is left to appear to be the largest leap.
A religious scientist allows himself these small steps and attention to detail because he is aware of his place in God's universe. He does not assume that he knows more than he can observe or analyze. He assumes the system is beyond his full comprehension. He does not mistake his methodical science for a full-blown acceptance of theologians. Yet, he is fully aware that he is but a small part of a greater system.
By accepting his role in the larger system, he allows himself the artistry to think like something other than himself. He can imagine himself in God's position creating the system and allowing it to work. He can allow himself to think like in a small part of God's universe. Einstein reportedly came to his theory of relativity by trying to think like a photon. He imagined himself in a place far different than he found himself.
Einstein did not presume that he knew the answer. He allowed himself to think in a way to discover the majesty of what he was attempting to be.
In modern science, particularly among scientists who seek publicity, there's a complete failing to even achieve this ability. They wish to have the notoriety of Einstein after the theory of relativity, without the thoroughness and solitude that Einstein had to endure prior to the theory of relativity being published.
These modern scientists are more childlike and demanding of respect than even the least humble 10-year-old.
When man removes himself from being the master of all he surveys and realizes that he is only the master of what his Master has given him, only then can the scientist as a mere mortal reach his full potential.
Indeed, great scientists do not need to be extremely religious. Often great scientists fall away from religion after achieving their greatness. Even so, the need for small steps of great science suggests that any scientist wishing to achieve would err in ignoring God having a greater place in his life.
Can these lessons be applied to modern science? I think it needs no further analysis than looking at the development of Global Warming or climate change or whatever the name of this ever-changing theory is today. These purported scientists have sought to take great leaps in science by taking great leaps in methods. Instead all they have accomplished is a theory that is battered and bruised despite making the scientists very rich. They have hindered science rather than helped.
I have always been impressed with the book of Job. While the set up for the story is a battle between God and his adversary, the real poignancy of the story is how Job handles stresses put on him.
As a humble man, he weathers the quite literal storms that he faces. To me, this ability to handle problems is one of the great strengths of religion.
Every person in life will face stresses and strains. What makes a humble person great is his ability to handle those stresses and strains while not losing his focus on what is important in his life.
In an ever competitive world of science, this ability to handle stress and maintain focus is paramount for a great scientist.
A great scientist also needs to be able to use that focus in order to work logically through problems. The most logical and efficient people that I have ever met take big problems and break them down into ever smaller parts. Only when they have mastered the smallest detail do they move forward with their project. The accumulative affect of this detail is the ability to move a project forward with great efficiency toward a very large vision. Most importantly, when the project moves forward, it needs to be rewritten or reorganized far less than a project done in bigger leaps.
In my study of great thinkers like Einstein or Newton, there's a great deal of emphasis on slow, small, and methodical analysis. The world sees the great leap forward, but the scientist works quietly on the small steps. His announcement of his new theory is left to appear to be the largest leap.
A religious scientist allows himself these small steps and attention to detail because he is aware of his place in God's universe. He does not assume that he knows more than he can observe or analyze. He assumes the system is beyond his full comprehension. He does not mistake his methodical science for a full-blown acceptance of theologians. Yet, he is fully aware that he is but a small part of a greater system.
By accepting his role in the larger system, he allows himself the artistry to think like something other than himself. He can imagine himself in God's position creating the system and allowing it to work. He can allow himself to think like in a small part of God's universe. Einstein reportedly came to his theory of relativity by trying to think like a photon. He imagined himself in a place far different than he found himself.
Einstein did not presume that he knew the answer. He allowed himself to think in a way to discover the majesty of what he was attempting to be.
In modern science, particularly among scientists who seek publicity, there's a complete failing to even achieve this ability. They wish to have the notoriety of Einstein after the theory of relativity, without the thoroughness and solitude that Einstein had to endure prior to the theory of relativity being published.
These modern scientists are more childlike and demanding of respect than even the least humble 10-year-old.
When man removes himself from being the master of all he surveys and realizes that he is only the master of what his Master has given him, only then can the scientist as a mere mortal reach his full potential.
Indeed, great scientists do not need to be extremely religious. Often great scientists fall away from religion after achieving their greatness. Even so, the need for small steps of great science suggests that any scientist wishing to achieve would err in ignoring God having a greater place in his life.
Can these lessons be applied to modern science? I think it needs no further analysis than looking at the development of Global Warming or climate change or whatever the name of this ever-changing theory is today. These purported scientists have sought to take great leaps in science by taking great leaps in methods. Instead all they have accomplished is a theory that is battered and bruised despite making the scientists very rich. They have hindered science rather than helped.
No comments:
Post a Comment