I've been sporadically working my way through a world history book for the last few years. Last night, I was reading a section on Averroes when the thought occurred to me that religion and science just don't ever seem to coexist well. I know this is no new thought, an I'm guessing Dawkins or Hitchens et al have addressed even this angle to it, but hear me out anyway.
My super-simple version of the great arc of European (haven't really gotten into what happened in the Americas or East Asia) History is this: the Greeks were the first to really formalize and secularize education and in so doing, made huge progress. The Romans came along and sort of halfheartedly continued things. Then Constantine "converts" and progress seems to come to a screeching halt, even regressed somewhat. Yes, there were probably other reasons, including barbarians taking over large parts of the Republic and its eventual fall, but I think the timing is interesting, even if coincidental. For the next nearly 1000 years, as the European nations become more Christian (and theocratic), the mantle of scientific and philosophical progress seems to pass to the Arab nations. To my understanding, Charlemagne expanded literacy, but it still remained isolated to the clergy, and even with expanded formalized education, no real progress was made in any field. It wasn't until the 12th century with the Crusades, that the Arab progress is brought back to the European nations, and not until the Renaissance and after, as thought becomes more and more secularized, that real progress occurs. Meanwhile, fundamentalist Muslim countries have now arguably regressed. So the question is--does religion impede science?
I'm no historian (which is why I'm reading this book), so please feel free to correct important details of my 2000 year gloss of European history. Also, apologies if this is old ground for some of you--it's a new thought for me, particularly as I was unaware of the scientific advances Arabs were making through the "Dark Ages".
I don't know if I'm unique in this, but for much of my life, I've bought into the idea that religion casts a light on all knowledge--that I have an almost unfair advantage in all areas of learning through my "knowledge" of the Gospel. It appears that not only is that not true, but that if not careful, it could actually impede learning. I guess you could argue that until now, no one has had a correct version of the Gospel. I think that falls short in a few ways, the most important being that if true religion really sheds a light on truth, then partially true religion should at least shed a partial light on it, and certainly not impede it, as it appears to have done.
I'll shut up now and listen.
My super-simple version of the great arc of European (haven't really gotten into what happened in the Americas or East Asia) History is this: the Greeks were the first to really formalize and secularize education and in so doing, made huge progress. The Romans came along and sort of halfheartedly continued things. Then Constantine "converts" and progress seems to come to a screeching halt, even regressed somewhat. Yes, there were probably other reasons, including barbarians taking over large parts of the Republic and its eventual fall, but I think the timing is interesting, even if coincidental. For the next nearly 1000 years, as the European nations become more Christian (and theocratic), the mantle of scientific and philosophical progress seems to pass to the Arab nations. To my understanding, Charlemagne expanded literacy, but it still remained isolated to the clergy, and even with expanded formalized education, no real progress was made in any field. It wasn't until the 12th century with the Crusades, that the Arab progress is brought back to the European nations, and not until the Renaissance and after, as thought becomes more and more secularized, that real progress occurs. Meanwhile, fundamentalist Muslim countries have now arguably regressed. So the question is--does religion impede science?
I'm no historian (which is why I'm reading this book), so please feel free to correct important details of my 2000 year gloss of European history. Also, apologies if this is old ground for some of you--it's a new thought for me, particularly as I was unaware of the scientific advances Arabs were making through the "Dark Ages".
I don't know if I'm unique in this, but for much of my life, I've bought into the idea that religion casts a light on all knowledge--that I have an almost unfair advantage in all areas of learning through my "knowledge" of the Gospel. It appears that not only is that not true, but that if not careful, it could actually impede learning. I guess you could argue that until now, no one has had a correct version of the Gospel. I think that falls short in a few ways, the most important being that if true religion really sheds a light on truth, then partially true religion should at least shed a partial light on it, and certainly not impede it, as it appears to have done.
I'll shut up now and listen.
Comment