|
The Jefferson
Center 208 Oak Street, Suite
101 Ashland, OR 97520
541.488.9450
|
| |
Science and Religion: A Personal Synthesis
In last winter’s issue of The Compass, Frank Lang brought us up close and personal to his views on science and religion. Here I reflect on his and my common ground and where we depart on the subject.
I share much of Frank’s perspective, stemming in large part from our common ground as practicing scientists. The genesis of my interest in science, however, differs from Frank’s. I didn’t have an evil cousin to confound me with skeletal remains. I do remember an evil yellow-jacket stinging my boy-scout hand on a backpack trip in the Olympic Mountains. Bless its heart, too, for it got me to thinking how crafty it was to have developed just the right substance on its stinger to deter me from future aggression. At the time, I didn’t appreciate now many eons of evolution were required to pull off that trick.
With no evil cousin to harass me and no further notable encounters with crafty little critters, it took a while for my interest in science to build and to merge with what I now think of as my religious sense. I bailed out from my Roman Catholic upbringing as a sophomore in college. How many of us felt tension with similar upbringings upon encountering “Western Civ?” For me, there was also the course in Comparative Religions, in which profound lecture after profound lecture admonished me and my fellow undergraduates to “open our eyes a quarter of an inch wider.”
It was the International Geophysical Year that provided the opportunity for my eyes to widen sufficiently. Observing the Aurora Australis against the star-studded black velvet of the Antarctic sky did the trick. It hooked me into my career in upper atmospheric research and solar-terrestrial relations. More germane to the present rumination, it guided me to union of mind and spirit. No longer did I have to conger up a super-natural entity to satisfy my sense of awe and thanksgiving. Rather, I could share the perspective that Carolyn Porco so eloquently presented to us at the Jefferson Center’s 2007 Fall lecture.
So here is a point of both commonality and departure between Frank and me. I don’t expect Science (capital S or not) to replace Religion (capital R or not). Rather, I am no longer torn by having to choose one or the other. Never will I expect religion to tell me how the world works. Never will I require the scientific enterprise unilaterally to fill my soul. As Frank expects of science, what it has done for me is to provide “reliable knowledge about the world” that allows me to escape religious dogma without robbing me of a spiritual sense.
When I search for a label to identify my spiritual perspective, my literal self suggests “scientific rationalist” or at least, without equivocation, “natural materialist.” With at least equal comfort, however, I choose the more frequently heard “religious humanist.” I make a distinction (albeit not a stark one) between that term and “secular humanist,” and I rely on it because it has been for me meaningfully defined by a Unitarian Universalist Minister, the Rev. Dr. Peter Luton. Rev. Luton has pointed out what he calls “a distinctive quality of religious humanism: its essential optimism and trust.” He has written as follows:
“In accepting that . . . knowledge and understanding are always subject to revision and improvement, (religious humanism) is at peace with ambiguity and paradox. It is comfortable with not knowing the absolute once and for all written in stone truth and rejoices . . . in the continual adventure of the spirit’s discovery and growth.
“A religious humanist, then, might be quite able to say, ‘Of course, I believe in rebirth as a religious experience. Why I have been reborn over and over again. Every time I grow in understanding or deepen my appreciation of my interdependence with creation, I am reborn.’”
As a scientist -- indeed simply as an observant human being -- how can I not appreciate my interdependence with creation? I am reminded each time that I view the night sky and know that I too am made of stardust; each time that I bask in the warmth of the sun; each time that I sense my kinship with the wolf, the raven, and the orca. And yes, when I contemplate quantum weirdness, I must once again come to peace with ambiguity and paradox.
With Frank, I see religion as providing useful and comforting myth and metaphor, and I find solace in reflective ritual. I cannot, however, recite creeds that require me to mouth beliefs that I gave up long ago, including gods, whether unitary or triangular. With Frank also, church for me “is about community,” about one in which I can express my sense of awe and appreciation and absorb the parallel (but not necessarily congruent) expressions of others.
Beyond such earth-bound community, science also reveals that I am an integral part of the interdependent web of all existence. So finally, when my consciousness subsides and my ashes and dust prepare to return from whence they came, I’ll remember a poem by my high-school friend, Janet Corley, who wrote:
“Snowflake,
uniquely designed,
journeying as no other,
in an instant loses self
not in snow
as part of snow.”
--Ed Fremouw
|
|
 |
|
|
| |
Frank Lang is a regular columnist for The Compass. Since he is serving the first year of his second term on the board and we neglected to include his biography in previous issues, we will rectify that oversight now:
Dr. Frank Lang is Emeritus Professor of Biology, Southern Oregon University where he taught systematic botany, plant ecology, conservation of natural resources, and biological illustration for over 30 years. His research interests include fern biosystematics and evolution, the history of botanical exploration in the Pacific Northwest and natural history, in general. He is in his second term on the Jefferson Center Board of Directors spending much of his time with publicity, the website and Internet communication. He hopes that the Center will remain a place where ideas can be freely and openly discussed and argued without fear of quarrels or retribution.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 Three little books: Philosophy, Politics, and Spirituality; one at a time
In the last year, I read three books that are little, not in content, but in size. For you heavy thinkers these three little books may trivialize grand ideas and concepts that you hold near and dear. For me, however, the high lowbrow or low middlebrow approach was just right. If you lack a sense of humor, don’t bother two of the books, especially if you are highly refined and easily shocked. The authors use “jokes” to illustrate various philosophical concepts. Some of the jokes are, well, naughty, but not nasty. The books are 5 by 7 inches and vary from 191 to 212 pages long, little books.
The first book by André Comte-Sponville, The Little Book of Atheist Spirituality, is quite different from the other two, written with some humor but no jokes, naughty or otherwise. In fact, the authors of the books with jokes endorse Comte-Sponville’s book. They write on this little book’s back jacket, “At last, a book that takes the current atheist/believer debate to a much higher, more humane level than any other we know.”
This little book has an Introduction, Chapters on “Can We Do Without Religion?” “Does God Exist?” “Can There Be An Atheist Spirituality?” and “Conclusion: Love and Truth.” No jokes, no cartoons; read it anyway.
For me, Comte-Sponville’s little book is a refreshing change from the rantings and ravings of the Neo-atheist crowd of Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris, and the like. He makes a reasoned argument that not all of religion is bad and points out that there are religions without God or Gods. By religion he means “any organized set of beliefs and rituals involving the sacred, the supernatural or the transcendent (this is in the broad sense of the term) and specifically involving one or several gods (this is in the restricted sense), which beliefs and rituals unite those who recognize and practice them into a moral and spiritual community.”
Comte-Sponville describes his personal story of moving away from his Catholic upbringing to his current state of what I would call benevolent atheism. He makes it clear that such a move isn’t for everyone but that it works for him. Others find solace and meaning as believers. His first chapter ends:
“Let us sum up what has been said so far. It is possible to do without religion but not without communion [not that kind], fidelity or love. In these matters, what we share is more important than what separates us. Peace to all, believers and unbelievers alike. Life is more precious than religion; this is where inquisitors and torturers are wrong. Communion is more precious than churches; this is where sectarians are wrong. Finally, -- and this is where fine people are right, whether they believe in God or not -- love is more precious than hope or despair. There is no need to wait until we are saved to be human.”
He might have finally defined spirit and spirituality in terms I can understand. I have the impression that his spirit is that part of us that “is” but is without substance or body. It is the result of our brain and nervous system at work with electrical impulses snapping and popping that give us thought, memory, and feeling. It can’t be weighed, measured, or held in hand. Our spirit is not our physical brain, or heart or spleen. However, it could be the bottoms of our feet. Our souls.
Spirituality is the life of the spirit, according Comte-Sponville. I don’t think that spirituality has anything to do with deities, the paranormal, or new age woo woo. It is something all humans possess, whether they recognize it or not.
Many people consciously seek “spiritual” experiences, others of us don’t. When I am out in the natural world doing what I do, walking, listening, looking, I sometimes get a pleasant feeling at a sight or sound, or smell, or when I get to the point on a steep climb up a rocky trail that my mind (or spirit, I guess) is beyond physical discomfort. I sometimes get a similar feeling when I figure out a perplexing problem, truly understanding meiosis for the first time, for example. It was similar to taking a slug of fine whiskey or brandy, with a warm flush of pleasure and a feeling of elation. I used to tell my students that it was an “Academic High,” something they should seek out for themselves, because it can become addictive.
Now, it is entirely possible I have it all wrong. Read the book yourselves and let me know what you think. Look forward to the two “naughty” little books in future Compass issues.
--Frank Lang
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Honorary Fellow named Scholar-in-Residence at the Center
Nigel Leaves, an Honorary Fellow of The Jefferson Center since 2005, has been named Scholar-in-Residence by
Bob Semes, Executive Director. Leaves participated in the Summer Institutes in 2005, 2006, and 2007 as a moderator
of the Roundtable segment of the programs. Author of the two-volume biography of radical Cambridge University
theologian Don Cupitt, Leaves has followed this with The God Problem, Alternatives to Fundamentalism, his latest book for Polebridge Press, publishing arm of the Westar Institute, home of the Jesus Seminar.
Leaves will also assist as a consultant at the Board of Directors’ annual retreat in July which will largely consist of an examination of Peter Druker’s The Five Most Important Questions You Will Ever Ask About Your Nonprofit Organization, led by board member Prem Dhanesh.
Coming from Perth, Australia, Leaves, a native of England, will be accompanied by his young son Sebastian who will spend part of his time in golf camp at Stanford University. Leaves is the Director and Dean of Studies at the Wollaston Theological College and Conference Center in Mount Claremont, a suburb of Perth. He received his education at Oxford Univesity and Murdock University (Australia).
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Oregon Shakespeare Festival Artistic Director featured at summer ‘Super Salon’
Bill Rauch, the new Artistic Director of the Oregon Shakespeare Festival in Ashland, will be the featured speaker at a special Super Salon on Monday, July 28, at 7:30 p.m. The location is tentatively set for Carpenter Hall across from the Bowmer Theatre on the OSF campus. Rauch will speak primarily on humanist themes such as reason and justice in Arthur Miller’s play, A View from the Bridge, and Thornton Wilder’s play, Our Town. Rauch comes to Ashland after holding positions as professor of theatre arts at the University of California at Irvine and Director of the Cornerstone Theatre of Los Angeles. He is a graduate of Harvard University.
The July Salon will meet only once, on a Monday evening, for this special presentation. Tickets will be available at the door. Please plan on attending the Super Salon, highlight of The Jefferson Center's summer program. Stay tuned for further information on The Jefferson Center’s website.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Wisdom from Thomas Jefferson
“I hope our wisdom will grow with our power and teach us that the less we use our power the greater it will be.” --Letter to Mr. Leiper, 1815
“The ground of liberty is to be gained by inches; we must be contented to secure what we can get from time to time and eternally press forward for what is yet to get. It takes time to persuade men to do even what is for their own good.” --Letter to Rev. Charles Clay, 1790
|
|
|
|
|
| |
More wit from Ambrose Bierce
Ambrose Bierce wrote the famous, or infamous (take your pick), The Devil’s Dictionary over a period of 25 years beginning in 1881. It is a satirical work, a dictionary with an attitude. Here are a couple of entries:
apologize, v.t. To lay the foundation for a future offense.
compliment, n. A loan that bears interest.
egotist, n. A person of low taste, more interested in himself than in me.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
An invitation - -
We invite readers of The Compass to submit letters to the editor on topics related to our newsletter content or The Jefferson Center’s mission. Use this email address:
editor@thejeffcenter.org
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Letter to the Editor
Sat., 17 May 2008
Dear Editor,
I attended a Jefferson Center lecture last year and have tried to find your organization ever since then. I couldn’t for the life of me remember the name, but I finally found you through the American Humanist Association and I am so thrilled!! I've searched high and low for an organization in the Rogue Valley where I could feel free to express my views of a rational world and be surrounded by like-minded folk. I knew you were out there, and now that I've found you I will definitely be attending meetings and events.
The dismay part of my subject line arose when I discovered that I discovered you AFTER Mr. Benson and Mr. Baker provided an amazing (I’m sure) evening of entertainment in April. I have great respect for both men and am quite familiar with their stories and current works. I'm only three weeks late. Darn! If I could just turn back the hands of time! Maybe with a little crystal and herbs... But I digress. With this kind of presentation, my excitement at having found “home” only increases. I look forward to meeting you all at the May meeting.
Best regards, Jessica Vineyard
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Program Committee
Bob Semes, chair
Prem Dhanesh
Carol Voisin
Frank Lang
Sandra Coyner
Anita Nevison
Nominating Committee
Michael Parker, chair
Annabelle Apodaca
Bob Semes
Publicity Committee
Frank Lang, chair
Betty Owens-Gordon
Carol Voisin
Harvey Ray
Sue Sager
|
|
| |
Executive Committee
Dave Johnson, president
Bob Semes, vice president
Michael Parker, secretary
Bill Southworth, treasurer
Development Committee
Bob Semes, chair
Finance Committee
Bill Southworth, chair
Ed Fremouw
Jim Littlefield
Prem Dhanesh
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
