Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Religion and science: need there be a clash?

By Stephen Cheleda - posted Tuesday, 19 May 2009


So how can we redefine a human being?

Humans are social beings, capable of perceiving and communicating concepts, which they do not or cannot directly observe, and are able to generate and control energy.

Whatever happened about 40,000 years ago, humans have acquired those special capabilities, which set them apart from what went before.

Every part of this definition of a human being has extensive connotations. Even the relatively simple concept of being social has to be clarified. Many animals and insects are, undoubtedly, social. They are social either for foraging, hunting or for defensive purposes. In addition to these purposes humans are social for creative reasons. To say that a human is social means certain characteristics, which add to the “social value” of an individual, are more advantageous in an evolutionary sense than when these characteristics are limited or absent.

Advertisement

One of the clearest examples of the ability to perceive and to communicate concepts that humans do not or cannot observe is that of Einstein’s mathematical proof of the existence of the power locked in atoms, long before it was proved to be so. Another example is the mathematical proof of the heliocentric nature of our solar system, without anyone being able to physically observe it from outside the system.

Regarding the ability to generate and to control energy, it ranges from making simple fires, to the creation and the control of atomic power. Even the ancient Greeks realised the importance of fire when, in their mythology, Prometheus gave it to humans.

Conclusions

Perceptions matter, not only on a personal level, but more importantly, in our world-view. The way we understand things guides our beliefs, and in turn, it determines our actions. If our perception is incomplete, our actions will be flawed. Conversely, if we draw the wrong conclusions from our actions, our perception will remain flawed. It can become a vicious circle. One reason for the demise of past civilisations was their inability to break out of their belief system. Therefore, it is important that, periodically, we re-examine our perceptions, whether it relates to individual interactions, or more importantly, if it relates to our commonly held view. The notions we hold about creation or evolution are some of those important perceptions.

Some scientists, who may deride those who tend to believe in ancient texts, may like to reflect on the possibility that they may not have fully considered all the facts pertaining to why religious belief systems persists. They may also like to consider that the current interpretation of evolution in the public domain may not be sufficiently adequate. The original message was “modification by descent”. Somehow the expression “survival of the fittest” gained prominence. (Probably it was a better sound bite.) The real meaning was “survival of the most adaptable”. (The most adaptable happens to be fitter in the general sense.) This has completely different connotations. Another point worth considering is the sheer time-scale involved in evolution, which is not readily appreciated by those who did not have the benefit of scientific training (which is the vast majority of people).

A fresh look at the definition of a human being would go a long way towards refocusing our worth, and our intentions.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

130 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Stephen Cheleda was born in Budapest in 1938 and has lived in the UK since December 1956. After working in industry, he became a teacher of Mathematics in 1971. Stephen did an MA in Peace Studies at the University of Bradford. He retired in 2003.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Stephen Cheleda

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 130 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy