Religion v. Science

Science is the search for enlightenment, also called the search for knowledge. It uses a methodology that limits what we can do to reach that lofty plateau. It is our surest way to find enlightenment because it lets us assume nothing while it places very demanding limitations on us. In contrast religion is the search for purpose; mainly, it is about answering why we are here. It assumes that which cannot be established by a methodology; namely that God is the driving force behind everything in the universe. Are these two pursuits mutually exclusive? Or can they coexist without the need for anyone to mock, maim, or kill to get others to believe them? I tried chasing down these two pursuits long ago. I found a middle ground that has served me well.

Technically, I am a scientist committed to finding answers to issues by using the best tools at my command. I draw upon six physical measurements, (length, mass, time. temperature, luminescence, and amount of substance—all extent in the universe). My task is to use mathematics and logic in reaching tentative conclusions about issues that are accurate, reliable, and useful within the boundaries determined by a set of procedures that establishes those limitations. I have never felt the need to debate anyone on the merits of science and religion or the differences between the two. Science is verifiable, while religious beliefs are not. Religious beliefs, however, too often find their way into our lives when legislators feel compelled to impose their beliefs on all within the scope of legislative duties to do so.

Religions draw upon dogma and assertions in reaching their conclusions about important issues. Western religions are chock full of assumptions, guesses, and surmise that are often based on many different interpretations of tales or dubious accounts handed to them, or on faith alone. I also do not know enough about Asian religions, or those found in Iran, or Africa in order to make a judgment about them. I am satisfied that when the two perspectives clash, science holds the upper hand. The following definition about Deism, however, satisfies my curiosity on the subject of God and the afterlife over all religions that I know something bout..

Deism is a philosophical belief that posits the existence of a single creator God who does not intervene in the universe after its creation. Deists believe that God created the universe and set it in motion, but does not interfere with it or the lives of the beings within it. They reject the idea of divine revelation and supernatural events, and instead rely on reason and logic to understand God’s nature.  Deists also reject the notion of prophets and the need for worship or specific behavior on the part of followers . They believe that any knowledge one has of God should come through one’s own understanding, experiences, and reason.  Deism is sometimes considered to be a reaction against theism in its various forms, which is the belief in a God that intervenes in the lives of humans and with whom you can have a personal relationship.

Deism also removes all clergy from the discussion, the rules they make, the need to attend church services, the validity of the Bible, the Koran, and other books of questionable origin; or when, where, or whether to make donations to anyone or to any cause. In short, Deists ask others to leave us alone to make what we will of the subjects of God, purpose, life, and the afterlife. I am inclined to accept the testimonies of millions who have had near-death experiences (NDEs) about an afterlife described by Spiritism—a nonreligious set of principles based on the findings of psychologists, psychiatrists, and those who have studied subjects of the mind. Thus, I am free on logical grounds to believe whatever I will about life drawing on empirical proof, and to live within the rules of decency set by society on others. The Golden Rule and following a set of behaviors that are consistent with my own perception of purpose lead me: Help the poor, the young, the sick or disabled, and the elderly within my abilities to do so, irrespective of their personal beliefs.

I believe in the goodness of Providence, the goodwill of others, and simplicity as my guiding star in all other matters. Greed, selfishness, and cruelty are my enemies. I don’t let the Perfect become the enemy of the Good, nor hate over Love. Free will and Justice are two essential goals that guide me.

Legislators need a lot more facts, a lot less guidance from their wealthy benefactors, and a bit more humility in their motivations when called upon to vote for or against any issue that affects us all.