Science & superstition
A.K. Sen Sarma
|
Even those pitching for a Supreme Designer will loathe to imagine Him doing the final engineering check of a space vehicle
|
A COMIC incident has brought to the fore the problem of rationalists, particularly in India. A group of space scientists had sought divine boost to a space vehicle by placing a replica of the rocket at the feet of a popular deity prior to its launch.
In a country where the majority are illiterates it would be logical to think that it is the load of ignorance that stands in the way of inculcating a scientific temper in this country. Few would suspect that it is the other way round. Professed `scientists' who are steeped in superstition are the real stumbling block. The question naturally arises how a scientist can be superstitious because superstition and science should indeed be antonyms.
Not quite appropriate
To understand the phenomenon of superstitious scientists, it is necessary to ponder the word `scientist' first. In most cases the word is used merely as a job description. The band of people usually branded as `scientists' are mostly those who just use, in their professional work, the knowledge acquired by others through the due processes of `science.'
Their job may not require them to follow any scientific method themselves or even to be aware of this process. The use of the term `scientist' in their case is not quite appropriate. They are really `scientific workers' — as are technologists and engineers.
Unfortunately it is not difficult to find actual practitioners of science to be steeped in superstition (this writer remembers an article some years back in a leading daily by a young and eminent physicist defending some of the prevailing superstitions as `beneficial'). In their case it must be the compartmentalisation of mind (a phenomenon theorised by some neuroscientists) that is responsible for keeping their logical faculties segregated from their emotional propensities.
Some neuroscientists go to the extent of postulating that belief in the supernatural has been `hardwired' into human mind much before the advent of logical faculties. If that is so it is very unfortunate that grooming in scientific method has not been able to eradicate the vestige of that primeval weakness from the psyche of these scientists.
It is quite inappropriate to invoke the name of Einstein and a few others, as some do, as examples of `believing' scientists. Their `belief' does not include the supernatural and is on a completely different plane from that of superstition. Modern science, while answering many questions, has thrown up some more whose easiest answer lies in invoking a Design and so, implicitly, a Designer.
But even those pitching for a Supreme Designer will loathe to imagine Him doing the final engineering check of a space vehicle. Some of these scientists are indeed basically irreligious, but even deeply religious people like Tagore or Gandhiji would have shuddered at the thought of an Almighty operating at a level where He can be coaxed into correcting the errors committed by an individual or a group fabricating the space probe.
The question automatically arises whether such beliefs can really be sanctified as `religious' and tolerated in the name of religious freedom (as, apparently, many are doing) or are these superstitions, pure and simple, not endorsed by any religious doctrine and should be opposed as antithetical to rational thinking. In other words whether one should respect the seekers of such supernatural interventions as `ethical equals' and their weird beliefs as `alternative viewpoints' (as has been suggested by some) or denigrate them as obscurantists!
Unfortunately the simple and straightforward answer to these questions becomes generally unacceptable to the majority because these go against persons commonly perceived to be upholders of rationalism. And this single reason provides the strongest support in sustaining the continued beliefs in practices like palmistry and astrology (and witchcraft in rural areas). And this single reason must be recognised as the most serious obstacle towards inculcating a scientific temper in this country and must be tackled first.
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Open Page
