More on the Scientist’s Faith

This recognition will resolve what may seem like a paradox to some: that profound and creative scientific minds can also be profoundly religious. Johannes Kepler and Isaac Newton were mystically religious, Galileo Galilei and Augustin Cauchy were deeply Catholic, James Clerk Maxwell and Michael Faraday were personally religious, Srinivasa Ramanujan and Chandrasekhara Raman were traditionally religious, to name only a few. There are countless other instances of great scientists acknowledging the existence of some supreme principle undergirding the world (Frankenbeger,1973). Weinberg explains this by saying that “religious skepticism is not a prejudice that governed science from the beginning, but a lesson that has been learned through centuries of experience in the study of nature” (Weinberg, 2002, 26-27). But this idea that scientists have finally awakened to the truth as against the clouded visions of their ancestors does not explain why Max Planck and Albert Einstein, Werner Heisenberg and John Polkinghorne still were (are) among the faithful.

The paradox is cleared up if we distinguish between different types of faith. Intelligibility faith is indispensable for the practice of science, just as religious faith is quite unnecessary for science. At the same time, religious faith is also quite neutral in its impact in the context of scientific research. The oft-quoted faith of scientists is quite different from religious faith. For many, though not certainly for all scientific thinkers, the existence of a superior intelligence puppeteering the phenomenal world suggests itself as a persuasive possibility, or even a deep-felt feeling. They are led to this on the basis of their global vision of a universe governed by precise and inexorable laws. However, this is very different from religious faith in the sense of an unquestioning acceptance of God or His messenger(s) with specific historical attributes such as traditional religions proclaim.

Indeed, unlike scientists of past centuries, most modern scientists, when they speak as scientists about God, refer to the Divine in generic terms, rather than with a name that is particular to a religion. It is important to distinguish this trans-denominational, non-anthropomorphic, mathematically sophisticated entity from the religious faith of traditional religions.

It is equally important to distinguish between science as an enterprise and religion as an experience, and to recognize that intelligibility faith goads us to further research, whereas r-faith gives us inner peace. Every scientist who works hard on a theory has full intelligibility faith in its correctness even if it is as yet only partially established, but this faith is very different from a committed Catholic’s Faith in Christ as the Savior or a devout Hindu’s Faith in Vishnu or in the law of karma.

Author

  • Varadaraja V. Raman is an emeritus professor of physics and humanities at the Rochester Institute of Technology. He has also taught at the Saha Institute for Nuclear Physics in Calcutta and the Université d'Alger in Algiers. He is the author of Indic Visions in an Age of Science, published by Metanexus.

Similar Posts

  • On the Essence

    Introducci�n. El problema del alma, uno de los m�s antiguos de la filosof�a, es tambi�n central en el pensamiento de Zubiri, hasta el punto de que cabe clasificar buena parte de su obra en funci�n de este problema; esta clasificaci�n, por otra parte, nos permitir� se�alar las fuentes zubirianas que vamos a utilizar aqu� en…

  • The Chosen Few

    Another important aspect of revelation is that it occurs only to select individuals, and conveyed only in a few chosen languages. Moses, Vedic Rishis, the Buddha, Nammazvar, and Mohammed are among the few historical personages who are believed to have been so gifted. Because in each of these instances God is said have communicated to…

  • |

    NSoR 4: The Evolution of Religion

    An excerpt from Chapter 4 of The New Sciences of Religion: Exploring Spirituality from the Outside In and Bottom Up (Palgrave Macmillan, 2010) Pages 89 – 91. Another evolutionary approach to explaining religion revives group-selection theory or, more properly, multilevel-selection theory. Selection works not just at the level of individual genes but also on networks…

  • Reductionism

    There seems to be quite a misunderstanding about reductionism, based on a strong misapprehension of what it allows in physics [which is where the idea comes from, after all!]. I think it would be salutary for those wish to seriously get involved in the area to get to know a bit about what the modern-day…

  • Statement on Winning the 2009 Templeton Prize

    Ladies and Gentlemen: First of all let me express my most heartfelt thanks to the John Templeton Foundation and let me tell President Templeton how deeply I feel honored at having received this prestigious prize, aimed at rewarding a significant contribution to affirming life’s spiritual dimension. Honored and, at the same time, feeling very humble…

  • What makes Science Islamic?

    I know I have wandered into difficult terrain.  What makes science Islamic, or in other words, what adds a religious dimension to science is a problematic question because the answer depends on certain definitions which are not universally recognized.  But let us try to look at the question from the perspective of Islamic tradition which…