View Full Version : Article Feedback

25th May 2011, 17:26
Hey guys, a friend of mine is starting a little 'zine' kinda thing and asked if I would write an article for it. I tossed around some ideas and decided that the enormous divisions in perspective between scientific and religious understandings might be a good place to start.

Hoping I could get some feedback on what people think so far.


Science to Religion and Back Again

Physics is a language, chemistry is a language and religion is a language.

They practice taking the unknowns of experience and apply variable extension; exploring these variables through reason and process. Passing on the learned understandings of this exploration to those within said spectrum of language through equation and to those outside it through metaphor in relevant symbolism.

This is how we communicate, explore and expand our universe. It is how we know what we know and why.

If your initial thought is that this is not an accurate reflection of current religious outlooks, you are correct within the presented leading percentile. However you are also correct in its reflection among the presented established scientific community - both of which now cater to rigid and dogmatic acceptance upon still controversial subjects as a means to ensure themselves among each ones respective 'priesthood'.

However let us examine the concept of both religion and science outside today's political tumult and rather look upon them as truer principles of the human condition rather than justifications of a particular egoic perspective. That is to say as a tool of human communication and understanding differing only in practice while motivated from the same principle. More specifically we will look to why they have come to define themselves apart in modern times and explore how this division of language takes place.

Initially it is important to realize that before the established became such it existed as the fringe; a small group of people interested in background functions. Monks, botanists or astronomers (many times all of these) deciding to measure reality upon as many concrete principles as they could define. Each new equation upon these foundations bringing about deeper knowledge of the shadowy regions of speculation.

Speculation was conquered by equation, the equation then being passed amongst the fringe group to further all interested understandings. It is quite possible that initially these were all direct understanding centered around observable forms in nature. We see this in the core of ancient practices such as numerology and gemetria which later become the foundations of astrology, alchemy and mathematics which in turn are entwined deeply in the roots of modern science and religion.

The thing about fringe understandings though is that they can only be communicated to other members of that fringe - e.g. those who speak the 'language'. To pass them outside this very specific perspective they must be anchored to symbolism available to a wider audience - they need to be embedded in metaphor. Be it a physicist explaining energy via waves in a pond or a rabbi explaining god through the concept of undefinable pressure - the concepts must be linked by symbol to the common perspective. So to those who enter this fringe they are very usually introduced to the concepts by those that have experienced them and to pass on the knowledge of this experience metaphor is used. Each fringe group carrying it's knowledge a little further while slowly acquiring the baggage of assumed reasoning.

In this we see the birth of dogma. Those groups that form around the fringe heavily investing in the metaphor and often missing the concept. These groups exist in both science and religion and quite often make up the bulk of both. Those lacking experience often being the ones to argue the loudest, rallying behind the names of great scholars who they possibly did not clearly understand in the first place.

From this we see division - we see schools of thought split on singular concepts. Politics and agendas driven by faulty understanding. Egoic constructs losing sight of principal and rather looking to satisfy perspective. Kings of edom ruling a cage of concepts all the time forgetting the foundation their castles were raised upon.

So what happens when the fringe disappears? When those that rally around them swallow them up or even turn against them on dogmatic principal?

Maybe someone tried telling us once upon a time in a story.