Hypothesis of Faith

Free will in the universe of Dune

2011-06-15T20:45:00.001-04:00

I assure you that the ability to view our futures can become a bore. Even to be thought of as a god, as I certainly was, can become ultimately boring. It has occurred to me more than once that holy boredom is good and sufficient reason for the invention of free will.

In light of my last post (How did I get here? Eating chocolate on the path of destiny), in which I pondered the ideas of free will and destiny, I chuckled when I came across these lines a few days later while reading. These sentences are from "God Emperor of Dune," by Frank Herbert. It's the fourth novel in the original Dune series.

Not familiar with Dune? I can't recommend the novels enough. I was never really into sci-fi as a reader, and this is probably some of the heaviest the genre offers. But I find it a fascinating, intoxicating exploration of themes that include religion, technology, politics, human evolution, economics, and more. Basically the kind of stuff I find myself fascinated by in real life.

A little context for the above quote: The "god emperor" the title refers to is, like his father before him, capable of casting his mind into the infinite possibilities of the future, exploring each and every decision, event, and seeming bit of minutia that led to it. This is part of the reason he comes to be worshiped across the universe during this reign — of several thousand years.

Quite ironically, these sentences were opposite another section of text that I thought worth posting at my other blog, Tangled in Wires: The 'God Emperor of Dune' on technology.

How did I get here? Eating chocolate on the path of destiny

2011-06-10T22:36:00.001-04:00

Laugh if you will, but "Forrest Gump" is still one of my favorite movies ever.

One of the most memorable moments comes at the end of the movie as Forrest stands in front of Jenny's grave and ponders humanity's path through life. In that scene he reconciles the philosophies of his mother ("Life is like a box of chocolates: You never know what you're going to get") and Lt. Dan Taylor (predestination, or just destiny, if you will) by suggesting that "Maybe it's a little bit of both, happening at the same time."

In the erstwhile days of my youth when I didn't have to ponder topics more immediate and grounded, I often wondered about this sort of thing, too. I also found myself thinking, like Forrest, it might be both happening at the same time.

I've been pondering this anew as I reflect on my life's path over the last 10 years, and the key events that led me to Ithaca. That, in turn, has allowed me to be geographically closer to my mother during — as it's become painfully clear — the wane of her time with us.

Skillful navigation or blind marching?

Was I just riding the waves of interests, chance, and opportunities to get here, or was my path set long before? Consider, as I have:

Was I meant to take that Intro to Journalism course my final year of undergraduate, and realize, "Hey, maybe I'd want to do this down the line, after I get the dirt out of my blood as an archaeologist?" I got rejected from the Intro to Creative Writing course and NEEDED the upper-level writing credits to graduate.

Was I meant to spend nearly five years at the museum only to decide to go back to school for a master's degree in journalism when I did?

Was it chance the opportunity at The Saratogian came up when it did, only three months after I started my first job as a newspaper reporter? My nearly-three years in Saratoga Springs were instrumental in attaining the experience and skills that made me a qualified candidate for the job I ultimately landed in Ithaca. As grueling as those years were at times, I'm beyond thankful for them.

Did the opportunities I pursued for employment in Ithaca open up just as it became apparent the Universe wasn't going to let my mom be free of cancer? My wife and I had been talking in earnest about returning to the area, but that really motivated me to push the job hunt into gear.

I could go even further and ponder why the only real talent I've ever considered myself to have is writing, or why my Intro to Journalism professor was a Newhouse grad, as was my best friend's brother, etc.

Honestly, you could go nuts trying to connect all those pieces in some fashion.

As to the question of whether we bounce through life or have an invisible, set path before us: I'm nowhere closer to an answer than I was as a teen, nor any closer than Forrest.

I guess it doesn't really matter because I truly believe I landed the job I was meant to. Being here, and closer to my mom, and my family, and some of my oldest friends (an hour's drive one-way as opposed to over two hours) has been the greatest blessing of my life to date. As furious as I want to be with the Universe at times, that fact tempers my anger.

Finding little hope in the American Cancer Society's 'More Birthdays' campaign

2011-04-01T20:55:00.000-04:00

Below is one of the TV spots for the "More Birthdays" campaign of the American Cancer Society. It's self-explanatory.

Very few things truly offend me. This commercial, and the one that immediately preceded it featuring another celebrity, came the closest anything has in a long time. I saw it as I stood in the rec room of my childhood home — getting ready to take my leave after a short weekend visit — while chatting with my terminal mother as she rested on the couch.

Maybe it was me, but the silence between us as we watched felt awkward. We resumed our conversation as if uninterrupted when the commercials were done.

Aggressive cancer that retreats and then comes back, retreats and then comes back, retreats in then comes back; that tests your faith; it strains your sense of hope. When your loved one has reached the point beyond treatment, where every single day is a gift, when a phone call you've dreaded your entire life — but now know to be inevitable — could come at any time, a message like "More Birthdays" rings very hollow, no matter how much you want it to resonate.

I do hope for more birthdays for those patients out there at war with cancer, I truly do. My mother turned 61 in November. If we even get to celebrate 62, I have no idea how empty that celebration may feel.

An effort in futility: Arguing God in article comments

2011-03-01T18:13:00.003-05:00

It's practically a morbid fascination that prompts me to read the comments left under an article at most news/information sites, especially when it's anything about religion, and especially when that religion is Christian.

Case in point, here are a few screen grabs of comments left under this post at CNN's Belief blog. I think these sum up the spectrum of responses one generally encounters under pieces of this sort, and is hopefully illustrative of the sheer silliness in trying to wage the rational vs. religious debate in this type of forum. (And if it's not illustrative, you probably shouldn't be reading my blog. On second thought, maybe you should be.)

Click each photo to enlarge for legibility:


I actually kind of dig what Wayshower writes. It probably comes closest to lining up with my own thoughts. I also like how the second commenter starts his contribution with "Roar!!!" Silly. And while the third comment is unoriginal in delivery, it's got just the right amount of snark to make me chuckle.


Proof that you can bang out your well-reasoned, nine-sentence, "outside the box of socialization" argument and still not change the opinion of someone whose mind is already set. Pithy response, too, which also earned a chuckle.

The first commenter is someone who has decided to focus exclusively on
the bad side of religion. That's probably the only angle of attack he has.
The second comment uses some highly specious reasoning to back up his
assertions about the Bible's validity. And the third commenter had me
until he brought up proselytizing, which strikes me as less an act of
morality and one rooted in the the very human realm of politics.

I don't have anything to add to the CNN post other than this: On a very general level, universalism, as it's defined in the post, appeals to me and is what I believe (though not necessarily the specific details of Heaven as traditionally envisioned in the Judeo-Christian view). However, I do like to think that the truly wicked and evil face some sort of punishment after they leave this plane of existence.

Empathy over apathy: The immediate benefit of prayer

2011-02-22T19:17:00.001-05:00

I'll let theologians and scientists argue about what happens when people pray. The former might assert that prayer creates a direct line to a higher power, the latter that it produces electrical and chemical reactions in the brain that put the mind in a certain relaxed state.

In recent months, I've come to find another, more immediate effect of prayer: mindfulness.

I'm guilty of getting ensnared by my day-to-day life and as a result, I put the majority of my thoughts and efforts toward what I'm doing, what I should be doing, what I want to be doing, etc. I'm guilty of wasting too much time in idle pursuits, or vegging out after a day of work, essentially wallowing in ambivalence

Sometimes, however, I recognize the need to stop and focus on the issues affecting others in my life about whom I care. Sometimes, I feel the need to go the extra step to intentionally broadcast my hopes and well wishes for those people to the universe, to the higher power I believe is out there. Whatever it is. This is the act I call prayer.

When I do that, I become acutely aware that life is so much more than what's going on in MY daily existence. It helps bolster empathy and dispel apathy. I focus on the challenges, setbacks, or illness others are facing, and my desire for their happiness, good fortune, and health. Or, barring that, their peace of mind, comfort, and contentment. Sometimes, I actively imagine sending the love I have to that person directly, across the span between our physical bodies.

Does any of it work? Is there a higher power actually receiving these thoughts and feelings, and acting on them? Are those well wishes and all that love being piped to the recipients for which I intend them?

Again, I'll leave it to believers and non-believers to hash out. Personally, I feel I've had prayers answered and prayers ignored. And that's OK, perhaps to be expected, even. Mindfulness of others is both humane and fundamental for human existence. For me, it's the most basic essence of prayer, the core that remains even after all religious trappings or rational explanations have been stripped away.

That's something valuable in itself.

Evolution debunked: Still no sign of those half-monkey men

2010-10-27T18:27:00.002-04:00

Here's one I missed from last week: Apparently Glenn Beck took to the airwaves of his radio show and used the fact he's never seen a "half-monkey, half-person" as a basis to question the theory of evolution. Now, this item at The Atlantic Wire, and the comments underneath it, cover all the points I would have wanted to make here: 1) Our closest genetic relatives are apes, not monkeys (yes, there's a significant difference); 2) There actually WAS an extended effort to promote the fact that the world is round; and 3) Beck's probably never seen God, before, either, yet has no problem accepting the idea that He's up there; 4) How does this guy have such unfettered access to the broadcast spectrum?

If anything, people like Beck and his zealous ilk (on both the left and right) are solid evidence of devolution: Of rational discourse, American education, scientific AND religious literacy, and a well-informed society.

The secret brain of God

2010-06-21T22:57:00.001-04:00

Dan Brown's novel "The DaVinci Code" exploded in the mid-2000s, smack in the middle of the culture wars that motivated me to start this blog. But the first outing of Brown's protagonist Robert Langdon in "Angels and Demons" was set in the heart of the science vs. religion debate.

The novel centered around the centuries' old spat between the Illuminati (in Brown's version, founded by the enlightened scientific minds of the Rennaissance) and the stodgy Catholic church of the era. It was an entertaining read (always one to be chronological, I read it when "DaVinci" was big, but didn't love it so much to really want to read the sequel) -- as were the films.

It's the easy comparison to make given this story about two John Hopkins researchers who believe Michaelangelo painted a subtle, hidden image of the human brain in one of his images of God as depicted on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. (Indeed, the original post at Time's Newsfeed starts with: "Calm down, Dan Brown — it isn’t fodder enough for a new book. But a new study alleges Michelangelo painted a subtle message into his famous fresco.") In fact, the article cites evidence of other such hidden images in the master's work for the church.

Why? From the "Telgraph" article that Time linked to:

By merging an image of God with a human brain, Michelangelo may have been seeking a covert outlet to show off his anatomical knowledge at a time when picking apart cadavers was frowned on by the Roman Catholic Church.

Alternatively, he may have been alluding to the wisdom of the Almighty or – more dangerously - hinting at his growing belief that ordinary Christians had the wit and intelligence to directly commune with God, rather than pray to Him indirectly through the Church.

That was an idea that would have been seen as heresy, particularly as the fresco is situated directly above the chapel altar.

Very mysterious. Here's the comparison image from the "Telegraph." Follow the link above for more photos of the Sistine Chapel panel in question.

Well ... I guess I see it. Maybe. Let me squint ...

This is a fascinating story. To be fair, though, the skeptical part of me can't help but think about the reification principle of Gestault Theory, that basically says our brains perceive shapes and images even when no such image has been drawn.

It's interesting to reflect on how some of the "science and faith" themes from 500 years ago still resonate today.

Now reading: 'Religious Literacy'

2010-05-18T23:11:00.004-04:00

Aliens haven't invaded since my last post, so we've got that going for us.

Speaking of unknown religions, several weeks ago I bought a book that's been on my want-list since it first came out: Stephen Prothero's "Religious Literacy: What Every American Needs to Know - and Doesn't." I was quite pleased to find it in the bargain section of the store, too, priced at a whopping $5.98. (My cover is red, though, not purple).

I've finally gotten around to reading it. I'm not very far in, and I don't know if I agree with EVERYTHING Prothero argues (for example, that the most important elements of religious literacy in America are doctrinal and narrative - I happen to think ritual is just as clutch. But hey, HE'S the chair of the religion department at Boston University, not me), but it's hard not to nod in agreement when you read:

Religious illiteracy makes it difficult for Americans to make sense of a world in which people kill and make peace in the name of Christ or Allah. How are we to understand protests against the Vietnam War, which compelled Catholic priesets to burn draft records in Maryland and Buddhist monks to set fire to themselves in Vietnam, without knowing something about Catholic just war theory and the Buddhist principles of no-self and compassion? How are we to understand international conflicts in the Middle East and Sri Lanka without reckoning with the role of Jerusalem in the sacred geography of the Abrahmic faiths and with the differences between Hinduism and Buddhism in Southeast Asia? Closer to home, how are we to understand faith-based electioneering if the "reds" on the Religious Right and the "blues" on the Secular Left continue to stereotype one another as distinct species? Is it possible to weigh the merits of Supreme Court rulings on religious liberty if we are unaware of the legacies of anti-Catholicism, anti-Semitism, anti-Mormonism, and anti-fundamentalism in American life?

Click here for more on the book at the Barnes and Noble website.

Hawking: Beware the aliens

2010-04-26T18:05:00.000-04:00

In keeping with the theme of Sunday's post: The renowned Stephen Hawking warns humans that aliens could be bad news.

The parallel he draws: The arrival of Europeans to North and South America, " ... which didn't turn out well for the Native Americans."

Superior technology and foreign diseases could all contribute to mankind's decimation in such a scenario; of course, it could go the other way, too (these themes are nothing new in discussions of alien invasions: H.G. Wells' "War of the Worlds" hinged on it, and it sure saved Tom Cruise's butt in the 2005 film).

For the purposes of this blog, what interests me is alien cultures and, more specifically, any sense of supernatural or spiritual practices/institutions.

That could be an exciting TV show: Anthropologists in Space!

Another possible parallel to the arrival of Europeans: proselytizing. Imagine a scenario where erstwhile space aliens try and convert large swaths of the human populace to their religion.

Actually, I find the theme ripe for speculation; religion and space travel are a theme I intend to develop in this blog.

CLICK HERE for the article about Hawking's warning.

20 years of inspired awe courtesy of Hubble

2010-04-25T12:12:00.005-04:00

If there's anything that stirs both scientific curiousity and spiritual wonder in me, it's photos taken of deep space.

The Hubble Space Telescope turned 20 yesterday. Here's the press release from the orbiting camera's official Web site, http://www.hubblesite.org/ (lots of great galleries on the site, too, which is where the photo at left came from).

CLICK HERE for some "Classic Hubble Hits" courtesy of MSNBC, including some sweet shots of colliding galaxies.

Weighing in on "Does God have a future?"

2010-04-24T01:53:00.002-04:00

This is a new beginning, in some ways. I started this blog over a year ago and let it fall by the wayside two months later. I pulled down most of the posts I managed to publish here (believe me, it wasn't many), but the very first, my mission statement, remains. Fourteen months later it still says exactly what I want it to say (though I corrected a few typos).

Plus, the significance of the date really speaks to the purpose behind this endeavor.

I encourage you to check out my mission statement right here.

What inspired me to jump back in was an airing of Nightline a few weeks ago, pitting famed spiritiual guru Deepak Chopra against famed skeptic Michael Shermer. Part of the show's "Face Off" series, the program pitted the two (plus their chosen deputy) in a debate titled "Does God have a future?" How could I not watch that?

Here's the first segment of the program Nightline aired (I haven't been able to rustle up a video of the full televised version, but that's OK. Additional links below):

Here's the written version of the story.

Here are links to full segments of the debate (you'll have to scroll down to the correct group).

Since it's been a few weeks since I've viewed this, and because I want to watch the video segments in full, I won't make specific comments. The theme, though, is exactly what this blog is about, so I'll share a few general points (opinions) knocking persistently in my skull during that time:

Science is about the details; Religion is about the sum of the details.

Science is concerned with specific answers, while religion seeks answers to our broadest questions.

A question to illustrate those opinions popped into my head as I typed: "Why do humans exist?" The scientific answer might being with: "Humans exist because of evolutionary forces that shaped organisms into certain forms according to the dictates of environmental and biological conditions ... " The religious answer might be ... Well, I would refer you to the religious tradition of your choosing.

I don't think either Science or Religion will ever satisfactorily answer the questions the other poses, because those questions are coming from different places within us ("us" being humans - individuals, societies, mankind at large).

Does God have a future? Yes, He/She/It does. As long as humanity exists and is asking the broad questions, religion will exist, too, in some form or another. As long as religion exists, there will always be a God, real or fictitious.

Mission statement: Hypothesis of Faith

2009-02-12T22:36:00.008-05:00

Simply put, this blog is about science and religion.

Or reason and faith, if you prefer.

More specifically, it's about how the two are often at odds — or made to be at odds — by opposite sides of the culture wars. My fascination with this topic was forged in large part during the crucible that was the Bush 43 years; the idea to examine it in blog form specifically, however, only came in the waning months of that administration. My purpose for this blog is both personal and professional: as a means to explore these themes for my own education and self development, and to use it as a launch pad for future writing projects.

Today, the 200th birthday of Charles Darwin (and Abraham Lincoln) seems like an auspicious day to officially start this blog up (it's sat languishing for several weeks after I created it). This post is meant to delineate my focus here, which will be useful for me as much as the reader (and since I have no readers just yet, especially useful to me).

So at the outset, here's what I think is important to know about me: I consider myself a man of both science and faith. Even as a child, I never felt the two to be mutually exclusive; never thought the two must inherently be at odds with each other. If God created the universe and life here on earth, it seemed natural that he would be the one to set in motion all these natural processes by which the natural world operates.

Of course, I never could explain the idea of Adam and Eve, but I never worried about it because I never bought into such strict interpretations of the Bible.

In fact, I never really bought into much of organized religion. As I got older, I became interested in Eastern religions (Zen Buddhism, Shinto, Hinduism) and philosophies, and like many Westerners, began to incorporate the aspects of those religions and ways of thinking that made the most sense to me into my own, very nebulous belief system. In high school, and again in college, as I learned about Islam, I also grew an interest in that religion and the myriad cultures that practice(d) it.

I gradually began to refer to myself as "nominally Catholic." Given the wide variety of belief systems I saw in the world, and the thousands of years behind many of them, I reasoned that no one religion could possibly have it ALL right. I started looking at them as different paths toward the same goals.

In high school I started getting interested in archaeology, and when I entered college, that was the course of study I pursued (along with the requisite courses in cultural and biological anthropology and linguistics). It's this education that most shapes the way I look at the world: through the lense of evolution and human culture. Through that lense, religion began to take on a fascinating new aspect: as a vital component of human cultures, in which social mores were codified and transmitted.

However, during my coursework, I was also struck by a point made by one of my adjunct professors: That "Science" (yes, with the big "s"), like "Religion," was a human construct, a way of looking at the world and seeking out answers. Like religion, it could turn dogmatic and seek to supress those things which went against established convention. That lesson has stuck with me ever since.

During all these years, though, I never lost the sense that there was something greather out there, something behind the veil in front of our eyes that we call "reality"; I never lost the sense that I was connected to it, that it flowed through me and everything around me.

Being nominally Catholic, it's most easy to refer to it as God, but I also like to think of it as a life force. Yes, this concept is no doubt influenced by the one made famous in "Star Wars," but for me it more directly comes from the concept of ki (in Japanese; chi in Chinese), which I'd become familiar with through my training in traditional karate.

Eventually my eduction rolled into a career in archaeology, and my co-workers, like many in the field, I think, were a particularly atheistic lot. My sense of connection with that greater-whatever waned a bit, in hindsight, but was never lost. In the nearly three years since I left that job, it's gradually begun to strengthen (for a number of reasons).

All of this brings me to the foundational motivation for this blog, an argument in the culture wars that most rankles me: that to believe in a religion is to be somehow "unevoloved." That faith in something other than reason and science is the sign of a weak mind. That a world without religion would be a world ruled by sanity and peace.

So this is my counter argument: Belief is an inherent part of the human condition; that to abolish religion is to deny a fundamental nature of our being; that any hope of abolishing it is, in fact, impossible.

To blame religion for all the world's ills, especially war, is near sighted. As a concept, religion sounds just as good on paper as capitalism, democracy, socialism, communism or any other human construct. In practice, all of those systems can, and have, been corrupted and bent to the will of humans. And whether the motivation is religious, economic or political, science has often served as the tool to do terrible things to other humans and our planet.

That's not to say I'm comfortable with unquestioning adherence to a religious faith, though. To cling to a belief system with a mind shut off from knowledge and insight accumulated through observation, research, experimentation, reason, deduction and reevaluation — the scientific method — is just as near sighted.

"Zealot" is a dirty word to me. I consider "hypocrite" to by one of its synonyms. I've found both religion and science inspire some to zealousy.

So again: This blog is meant to mediate the scientific and religious. My goal is to learn more about the natural and social sciences and the many faiths of the world, and how they all contribute to our quest as humans: To seek and know. I hope it inspires good dialogue and debate. I'm looking forward to the journey.