The announcement of this talk reminded me of a statement by one of my directors at CERN. When young hopefuls in high-energy physics complained about the lack of university chairs, he said: A physicist can do anything ... almost. In fact, only a few could expect to become high-energy physics professors, but there were ample openings in information technology during that time. These are nowadays taken by people with special education in IT. So, a physicist talking about religion?
Professor Urban told the audience that he had been personally interested in understanding what religion really is. He has tried to address the question using a scientific approach and blamed the Church Fathers for successfully hindering the development of science for centuries.
Professor Urban told the audience that he had been personally interested in understanding what religion really is. He has tried to address the question using a scientific approach and blamed the Church Fathers for successfully hindering the development of science for centuries.
For Augustine, science is just an ancillary discipline, and faith surpasses knowledge, whereas Jerome (Hieronymus) regards philology as necessary only when reading and translating the Bible. While the Latin version of the New Testament, the Vulgate, is the basis of Christianity, the historical development of the Church was more influenced by the writings of the Church Fathers. The Reformation did not change this, for Erasmus and Luther relied heavily on them.
While Wikipedia tries to define "religion" as either substantial (the transcendent holiness, the religious feeling) or functionalist (the community), these two definitions are not exclusive.
In one of his slides, Professor Urban presented a collection of material with two main categories: "religion" and "religiosity."
Religion originates in observing our environment when the amazement about its incomprehensibility reaches our brains. Explanation attempts lead to "world models" aiming to answer the meaning or purpose of our existence. This process is by no means static but of a burning dynamic.
At this point, Einstein's "definition" of religion may be helpful:
While Wikipedia tries to define "religion" as either substantial (the transcendent holiness, the religious feeling) or functionalist (the community), these two definitions are not exclusive.
In one of his slides, Professor Urban presented a collection of material with two main categories: "religion" and "religiosity."
Religion originates in observing our environment when the amazement about its incomprehensibility reaches our brains. Explanation attempts lead to "world models" aiming to answer the meaning or purpose of our existence. This process is by no means static but of a burning dynamic.
At this point, Einstein's "definition" of religion may be helpful:
 |
| The most beautiful experience we can have is the MYSTERY. This fundamental emotion stands at the cradle of true ART and true SCIENCE. Whoever does not know it and can no longer wonder, no longer marvel, is as good as dead, and his eyes are dimmed. The experience of mystery — even if mixed with fear — engendered RELIGION. Knowledge of the existence of something we cannot penetrate, our perceptions of the most profound reason and the most radiant beauty, which only in their most primitive forms are accessible to our minds: It is this knowledge and this emotion that constitute genuine religiosity. In this sense, and only this sense, I am a deeply religious man. |
Other quotations from Einstein deepen his conviction: Every scientist becomes convinced that nature's laws manifest the existence of a spirit vastly superior to that of men. Behind all the discernible concatenations, something subtle, intangible, and inexplicable remains. Veneration for this force is my religion. To that extent, I am, point of fact, religious.
This firm belief in a superior mind that reveals itself in the world of experience represents my conception of God. My God created laws … His universe is not ruled by wishful thinking but by immutable laws. The divine reveals itself in the physical world.
There is harmony in the cosmos, which I can recognize with my limited human mind, yet some people say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me to support such views ... I am not an atheist. I don't think I can call myself a pantheist ... but there are the fanatical atheists whose intolerance is of the same kind as the intolerance of the religious fanatics and comes from the same source.
Professor Urban placed a "complete" overview on his last slide. Religions eventually arrive at "closed" world models pointing to their "last" mysteries. Religious groups close themselves off and fight other groups in bloody wars: Templars against Saracens, Catholics against Lutherans and both against Calvinists and Anabaptists, Shiites against Sunnites. Where do brotherly love or even the Christian love of the enemy come in?
What makes me sick is that while only a few are fanatic in their religious practice and belief, many (mis)use their religion as an instrument of power either to suppress their people or as a pretext for "holy" wars. No war ever was, is, or will be holy.
Let me finish by congratulating Professor Urban on his efforts, ending with a conciliatory quote by our eminent physicist:
*
This firm belief in a superior mind that reveals itself in the world of experience represents my conception of God. My God created laws … His universe is not ruled by wishful thinking but by immutable laws. The divine reveals itself in the physical world.
There is harmony in the cosmos, which I can recognize with my limited human mind, yet some people say there is no God. But what really makes me angry is that they quote me to support such views ... I am not an atheist. I don't think I can call myself a pantheist ... but there are the fanatical atheists whose intolerance is of the same kind as the intolerance of the religious fanatics and comes from the same source.
Professor Urban placed a "complete" overview on his last slide. Religions eventually arrive at "closed" world models pointing to their "last" mysteries. Religious groups close themselves off and fight other groups in bloody wars: Templars against Saracens, Catholics against Lutherans and both against Calvinists and Anabaptists, Shiites against Sunnites. Where do brotherly love or even the Christian love of the enemy come in?
What makes me sick is that while only a few are fanatic in their religious practice and belief, many (mis)use their religion as an instrument of power either to suppress their people or as a pretext for "holy" wars. No war ever was, is, or will be holy.
Let me finish by congratulating Professor Urban on his efforts, ending with a conciliatory quote by our eminent physicist:
No comments:
Post a Comment