From: hakim@bigq.enet.dec.com (Kamran Hakim)
Subject: Re: scientific religion
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 09:43:52 GMT


Arindam writes:

AG>Unfortunately, I consider religion as the science to understand spirituality
AG>and the ultimate aim being to establish religious laws with as much rigor
AG>as scientific laws: the process is just beginning.
AG>This requires that there be only ONE way

In article <1992Aug11.194409.24893@gn.ecn.purdue.edu>, prasanth@gn.ecn.purdue.
edu (Ravi K. Prasanth) writes...

RKP>More importantly, scientific endeavors are characterized by
RKP>skepticism. 

This is very correct. Skepticism is a major factor in science.

RKP>Whereas, religion is based on belief. 

Once again, it is very true that religion is based on belief as we
set out to observe a "religious person". As far as the observer
can see, "belief" is the only distinguishing factor between the
"religious person" or "any other NONreligious person". However,
I think you have missed the point which Arindam has attempted to
make. Namely, RELIGION CAN BE SCIENTIFIC IN ITS APPROACH. That is
to say, one can scientifically approach religion in order to adopt
one's belief. The question is what does a scientific approach
imply and how can such an approach be applied to religion?

In my humble opinion, a scientific approach implies one's reliance
on three factors:

A- Observation through the power of SENSES.

B- Intellection through the power of REASON.

C- INSPIRATION.

Through a mixture of the above mentioned factors (i.e. a condition when 
all factors agree with one another) one can scientifically examine the 
environment and either postulate models for physical events and formulate 
them.

How does this scientific approach apply to religion? Before I get to discuss 
this issue I want to point out that religion appears to serve a purpose in
human life that none other human institution would offer. It deals among
other things with one's sense of morality which man has been unable to 
democratically legislate into the life of the society. I am not going to
discuss the purpose of religion any further since the goal in this discussion
is different. Once again, how does this scientific approach apply to religion?

There are two modes by which one can obtain one's "religious beliefs":

1- Through INHERITANCE. This is a process in which one adopts a set of
   beliefs BLINDLY without any personal attempt to independently examine, 
   understand and accept. Therefore, one's commitment comes about as a 
   token of traditional validity, and through family expectation. Such
   an approach to religion is perhaps the dominant historical mode for
   the perpetuation of religion. This is why one born in a Jewish family
   will generally end up to be Jewish and one born in a Muslim family
   will end up to be a Muslim.

2- Through INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION OF TRUTH. This is a process in which
   one subjects one's belief to FOUR criteria:

   A- Observation through the power of SENSES.

   B- Intellection through the power of REASON.

   C- Scriptural or traditional authority.

   D- INSPIRATION.

   The criteria for acceptance would be when all four factors are in
   agreement, else, rejected. If religious belief is subjected to such
   a criterion for judgment, then one has scientifically established
   his belief through independent investigation as oppose to blind
   acceptance.

NOTE: I hope you realize that neither Arindam, nor myself are mixing 
      religion and science here.

RKP>It is an
RKP>irony that the person who wants to establish "scientific 
RKP>religion" claims to be of Bahai faith.

Another aspect of Arindam's posting has dealt with the spiritual aspect
of human existence, suggesting: As "science" (and by science I mean 
scientific approach -a methodical approach in understanding the physical
phenomena-) has assisted us to gain deeper insight into how physical
laws operate, by the same token we should be able to apply the same 
methodology and approach to religion. The benefits of such an approach
is twofold: Either we learn to PROPERLY use religion as a positive
factor in human life, or we can demonstrate it total uselessness and
reject it once and for all from human affairs.

RKP>If beyond all the rhetoric, Arindam truly wants to understand
RKP>the truth, then IMO, he should start questioning. Question 
RKP>everything, including dead/living prophets. 

With all due respect I think that you are judging Arindam prematurely 
prior to understanding what he is really saying. His zeal in sharing
his new philosophical path in life is giving you a false impression
that he is another religious fanatic who doesn't know what he is
talking about.

I hope this clarifies some of the misunderstanding.

Warm regards,

Kamran Hakim
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian