philosophy, politics, historyThis question comes via Jennifer Michael Hecht. She asked it rhetorically and followed up with “it doesn’t make sense.” She was talking about her book “Doubt: A History” and noted that historically doubters have not been in a turf war like the current science vs religion debate. As Epicurus, an early atheist, said, “it feels good to pray, you might as well.”
She further explained that recognizing that there is mystery does not require that you have to fill in the blanks with imaginary ideas. She lays out that
Her book came out in 2003, before the “The God Delusion”. Since then, I would say the climate has swung even more towards the “turf war” than away from it. I am interested in direct responses to the questions as well as responses to her position and how it speaks to being open minded as an atheist.
So the question remains, “How can you be against the idea of mystery and have your eyes open at the same time?”
I have not read Hecht’s book, so I don’t know if I am addressing her meaning of it, but from what I read in your question, I will attempt to respond.
As a (junior) scientist, I would say, Yes, of course there are mysteries in the world, if there were not, science would be “finished” and that is not going to happen soon (if ever).
As an atheist, I would also acknowledge that there are mysteries/unknowns in the world. Sure, in many ways, the real world is stranger than any mythical world (but not as illogical). For me, that is the beauty of it. There is no need to fill in those gaps in knowledge with mystical “explanations”, miracles or myths. Indeed, such “explanations” of strange events would mean the end of the story, whereas, for science, it is the beginning of the story!
As Hecht seems to say, if you do not acknowledge any mysteries in the world, then you are claiming that everything is known and explained already, which would be an incredibly dogmatic and close-minded position to take.
To me, there is no need to invent lofty religions, the world is already an overflowing fount of real wonders! And, judging from conversations I have had, I would say that a similar attitude is fairly common among scientists.
To quote Einstein (from the end of “My Credo”): “To me it suffices to wonder at these secrets and to attempt humbly to grasp with my mind a mere image of the lofty structure of all that there is.”
Assuming she means something like “pretending there is nothing to find is incompatible with searching” then I agree, but it’s also pretty facile, as observations go. On the other hand, if she’s referring to mysticism, to not wanting to find anything deeper, then I disagree since that kind of hostility towards more understanding is equally hostile to “open eyes.”
One analogy might be to different gears in a car, or different “modes” of thinking: you flail around in 1st (open to mystery) until you get traction (mystery in an interesting subject), then shift into a higher gears when you want to get going (progressively refuse to tolerate any mystery in that subject).
In terms of how it speaks to me about being open minded, it’s up there with a lot of self-help materials: useful so far as it goes, but incomplete and one-sided.
All content is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.