Monotheism, Atheism and Spirituality
In the Sunday edition of the Neue Zürcher Zeitung (NZZ am Sonntag) two scientists,ther immunologist Beda M. Stadler, from the University of Berne, and the geneticist Dean Hamer, from the National Cancer Institute in Bethesda, Maryland, explain their relationship to religion and spirituality.
Stadler asks for a "Coming Out" of atheists for the Swiss federal elections due in autumn 2007, in order to assure the liberty of scientific research that is constantly challenged by religious fundamentalists.
Hamer, author of a series of publications on genetic determination of behaviour
(e.g. "Rethinking Behaviour Genetics", Science vol. 298,5591:71-72/4 October 2002)
concentrates on the question of the interactions between religion and spirituality.
From the results of his research on the influence of gene VMAT2 on spirituality and the capability of "self transcendence" in individuals, Hamer concludes that spirituality might be a genetic trait useful for survival of the species, but he does not identify a direct link between religion and spirituality.
The central questions that emerges from the positions of both Stadler and Hamer is the following:
1. Is spirituality compatible with modern scientific research?
2. Does spirituality interfere with the capacity to critical rational thinking?
3. Is spirituality necessary for religious orientation?
4. Is religion a technical substitute for those lacking natural spirituality?
5. Is spirituality compatible with atheism?
Osservatore Profano cordially invites the blogger community to answer his questions
3 comments:
Tough questions on spirituality.
They call for a little spiritual aid.
Here are the answers to your questions by the Magic 8-Ball (http://8ball.tridelphia.net/):
1. Most likely
2. As I see it, yes
3. It is decidedly so
4. Ask later again
5. Outlook not so good
1. No! Scientific research has the obligation to find scientific explanations for pseudo-spiritual appearances.
2. Yes! The belief in spirituality requires the belief that logic and rationality aren't absolute and can't be imposed on every question.
3. Yes, of course! That's why there are still many people of faith. It can't be just the bread and wine.
4. In the end it's the same humbug.
5. Noooo! Only the ever-undecided people who are called agnostics have spared themselves some spirituality.
Now my question: Is religion necessary in politics? To be precise: Is it a requirement for a functionig society, which is the base for a liberal-democratic system?
I am grateful to Epicure and Rossi for their answers.
Now here is my own position:
1. Q:Is spirituality compatible
with modern scientific
research?
A: Yes, as long as the person's
spiritual disposition does
not interfere with his/her
rational thinking, his/her
honesty in methodological
and technical procedures and
documentation of results,
and his/her interpretation
of results. Spirituality
in this case will have an
influence on the motivation
of the researcher for a
particular discipline or a
specific research theme, but
the risk that it will
interfere with the quality
of the reserach is comparable
to the risk presented by the
funding of research by
private enterprises or the
state.
2. Q: Does spirituality interfere
with the capacity to critical
rational thinking?
A: No, if the conditions
formulated in #1. are
respected, i.e. the capacity
and readiness
of the individal with a
spiritual disposition to
separate this disposition
and rational thinking
3. Q: Is spirituality
necessary for religious
orientation?
A: No. Religious orientation
may be chosen on a purely
rational basis or as a means
to reduce social and/or
ethical conflicts in every-
day life
4. Q: Is religion a technical
substitute for lacking
natural spirituality?
A: As a logical consequence
of my answer to #3.: Yes,
I am convinced that religion
may have this function, and
that religious leaders
consciously use and abuse
this element.
5. Q: Is spirituality compatible
with atheism?
A: Yes, and once again under
the conditions described
in #1. and #2. The conscious
self might decide to opt for
atheism, and the spiritual
disposition might be the
motivator to decide that
way.
Now for Rossi's question on religion and liberal democracy:
My answer is clear: the history of modern democracies (e.g. the U.S.A.) have shown that religious orientations - and in particular multiple religious orientations, even those of sectarian character -might be helpful for the development of liberal democratic decision processes, for the simple reason that they help people understand that personal religious feelings can not be homogenized, thus facilitating a dialogue "over the fence". In contrast to societies with heterogeneous religious communities, religious monopolies (Roman Catholic or Muslim) heavily interfere with the development of liberal democratic structures.
Post a Comment