Science and religion, as well as science and spirituality, have recently been the subject of many lectures, discussions, and lectures. For example, the Boyle B2005 lecture, organized by Simon Conway Morris, addressed this topic. In his latest book, “Dolphin of God”, Richard Dawkins tries to show that the concept of God and religion is deceptive, and even “the existence of God is a scientific hypothesis, just like any other”. it means that he proposes to scientifically deal with the existence or absence of God [DAW b, pp. 72, 83 etc.]. November 2007 I took part in a group discussion at the medical conference “Science and Spirituality” and I was very dissatisfied with what I heard. On the other hand, I criticized my article: “Is there any spirit or something in the universe?” And I noticed that I need to clarify some issues. However, I decided to restructure, deepen and clarify some thoughts about the title of this document and mention the above-mentioned ideas. I will talk about the misfortune between science and religion, which could be removed in both areas, which I would call ‘scientific spirituality’. To describe such a spirituality, which means that hypotheses are formulated instead of faith, I am writing these two terms in paragraph 2 and showing their differences. In paragraph 3, I discuss what I think is the right cognitive approach, which I call the scientific point of view. In Chapter 4, I describe what I mean by “materialism,” which shows that there are two types; I show that this global approach, if consistent, can not have different human characteristics, especially free will. In chapter 5 I am talking about spirituality, from which I also introduce two kinds. one of them, the above-mentioned “scientific spirituality” uses a “scientific approach” to knowledge. By adopting such a global view, one can, for example, recognize human qualities that are not logical from a materialistic point of view. Chapter 6 of Freedom shows that there are worldviews that combine materialistic and spiritual images. Modern science is discussed in paragraph 7, which shows that it is essentially materialistic. In chapter 8, I describe some of the features of institutional religion, describe the nature of the spiritual vision that they embrace, and explain that they are in some respects materialistic. The current gap between science and religion is described in paragraph 9, where I can show how it can be removed by changing these two things. I also say that this abyss is caused by biased materialism and spirituality inseparable from institutional religions. In chapter 10, I will explain the various reasons why someone agrees with the materialistic approach, and in chapter 11 I do the same for scientific spirituality. Finally, in chapter 12, I describe an example of scientific spirituality, which seems to be suitable for a contemporary person and briefly describes some of its features and application.
1. Hypothesis and faith:
Over time, people gradually improved their mental abilities. One of the consequences of this fact is that today all adults want to understand. For example, by observing phenomena, everyone is trying to understand why this is happening. Even with the adoption of social laws and regulations, without understanding the reason for their existence, they no longer meet them. (For brevity, from now on I will use the man “he” instead of “him”, “his” and not “his” etc., so that it is logically coherent and what he sees outside and inside. he should guide his thoughts, feelings, and actions. In terms of worldviews, it is important to distinguish between the hypothesis of work and that which is faith. Let us begin by examining the characteristics of each of them and the differences.
2. Scientific attitude:
The scientific approach is one of the greatest conquests of humanity. After the beginning of the fifteenth century, he began to develop effectively as an individual’s attitude. At that time he appeared to some people. It should be used when something is monitored and described, and when formulating concepts. In these cognitive activities, I find the right approach to the modern person. This means that a person who does not work scientifically in their daily cognitive life unnecessarily returns to the past. However, it is important to realize that this approach does not apply to all human life because knowledge is only part of it because it is explained after specifying the main features.
I am talking about materialism as a global image that only allows the existence of physical phenomena in the universe. According to this theory, the world consists only of physical matter and energy, and their phenomena have only physical causes. There is no detailed knowledge on this subject. But we have an intuitive idea because we are confronted with our senses. We also have an intuitive concept of what energy is because each of our physical activities requires some effort that takes place in time and is called physics. There are two types of materialism. I call the first scientific materialism, characterized by the adoption of a worldview at the beginning of this chapter, from a strictly scientific point of view; Paragraph 3. There is, therefore, no scientific approach, in particular, 3.1 (because it means faith); ). The most common difference is that the scientific materialist must be open and interested in the intangible worldview. He must be prepared to check his position if he is convinced that there are no physical phenomena. On the other hand, the material of faith values its vision as a dogma and is not open to the world that recognizes the existence of nonphysical phenomena. In general, not only tries to get to know such opinions but also avoids contact with an approach that is not materialistic.
I am talking about spirituality as a worldview that recognizes both physical matter and energy as well as physical phenomena – not physical “material” and nonphysical phenomena that include this “material”. An important part of spirituality is also the hypothesis that nonphysical phenomena can affect physical material. In this chapter, I will briefly describe my theory, which may occur in certain phenomena of life and people. There are two facts that are not logical and can be understood as strong evidence that spirituality can be a logical justification: the source of physical matter and energy and the limits of the universe. Like materialism, there are two types of spirituality. I call the first scientific spirituality, which is characterized by the recognition of the worldview mentioned at the beginning of this chapter from a purely scientific point of view; setting. I will call a “spiritual” person who accepts spirituality in the above sense. It should not be confused with the common understanding of this word as a person who believes in communicating with the deceased. It may be strange that a clergyman may be guided by a strictly scientific approach, as described in Chapter 3. See what has been said in this chapter. It seems that the requirements of this approach in no way limit the phenomena of the universe to the physical. Like materialism, there is only one kind of scientific spirituality, but there are many types of spiritual spirituality. In the latter case, a scientific approach to certain phenomena and beliefs is accepted.
5. Combinations of materialism and spirituality:
Many people take a global view, which is a combination of the two phenomena described above, ie the materialistic and spiritual approach to others. This applies to many scientists who realize that the production of materials and energy does not have a physical source. They do not assume that they allow only physical processes; However, as a hypothesis of work or faith, they believe that the physical world is left to themselves after this work and that there is no further action from nonphysical phenomena, i.e. They are deists. So, as far as the origin of the universe is concerned, they are clergy and all other materialists. One such case was Einstein, who admitted that God created the laws of nature; but after this work, it does not work anymore, especially with people. He expressed this fact and said he was against a “personal” God who punished or rewarded everyone: “Anyone who is seriously involved in any scientific work is convinced that there is a spirit that manifests itself in the laws of the universe …” [ISA , 398]; “I believe in Spinoza, who manifests itself through the orderly reconciliation of everything that exists, but I do not believe in God who is dealing with the fate and work of mankind.” in research they are 100% materialistic, but they are clergy, while recognizing their religion (both types of faith).
6. Modern science:
Modern science is essentially materialistic. It is enough to read scientific magazines and it turns out that explanations and theories are based solely on physical processes. For example, no one makes a hypothesis that thinking may not have a physical origin and that nervous activity may be a consequence, not a cause of thought. I am convinced that the article, which explicitly refers to this hypothesis, will not be accepted for publication in an acknowledged scientific journal. On the other hand, popular science journals usually express any form of spirituality. The fact is that people are more and more convinced about the success of science and technology. 1976 I published a document (only in Portuguese) on the subject of “Computer as a tool for scientists”, in which I indicated what confidence in science means. For example, I believe that thanks to this belief, people lose respect for nature (incidentally, “respect” from a strictly materialistic sense cannot be logical because the subject has no respect). In this way, the intuition of the right place where you can apply science and technology is lost, and all kinds of exaggerations appear. See My work “Technology Mission”.
7. Institutional religions:
Almost all institutional religions are clergy because they are based on faith and dogma. One of the consequences of faith is the intolerance existing between different religions. This is the result of other misunderstandings. However, this requires understanding what is behind each religion. It is important to clearly start with what was originally in religion and what became part of it thanks to the traditions and interpretations gathered in time.
8. The abyss between science and religion:
Nowadays, it is often thought that there is a gap between science and religion because all areas are completely different. This means that science has nothing to say about religion, and the latter has nothing to say about scientific facts (these facts cannot be related to research ethics). There are even many scholars who distinguish them, that they consider themselves religious. The reasons for the existence of such a rock are two. The first is a deep prejudice against religious materialists who ignore spirituality and often joke, refusing to take it into account. The second is the dogmatism of religious spirituality, especially the institutional religion because they do not know the concept of cognition from an anti-scientific point of view; This for many reasons leads to a negative materialistic reaction. It is worth noting that each of them feels threatened.
9. A modern spirituality:
In my opinion, the proper worldview of the present human condition must be a scientific spirituality. It must, therefore, be based on understanding, research and hypotheses, and not on beliefs. It must preserve individual freedom and individuality, awareness and self-confidence. He also considers adults as responsible beings who respect and sympathize with nature and people. All this should be based on understanding what the other and the universe are, not moral dogmas. It must also provide a theoretical and broad system (eg Understanding of ancient religious and mystical traditions, but also historical facts). This theoretical structure, its worldview, should lead to practical actions reflecting the application of its concepts in all human life so that everyday life in everyday life can be as consistent as possible with its worldview.