ISIDRO JUAN PALACIOS - Madrid, España
In what instant does the scientist breakaway of the religion and why is it returning to her?
Frank J. Tipler, a North American physique that two years ago published a sounded book (The Physics of Inmortality. Moden Cosmology. God and Resurrection of the Dead) spirit among us as: The physics of the immortality (Editorial Alliance, Madrid, 1996), he has written: "It is not habitual to meet at the moment with a book that he/she pleads for the unification of the science and the religion. It is outside of the common thing that a work affirms (...) that the theology is a branch of the physics; and that the investigators of the physics will be able to deduce the existence of God and the plausibility of the resurrection from the deads to the eternal life by means of the appropriate calculations, in the same way that they calculate the properties of the electron. Naturally the reader will be able to wonder if I am speaking seriously."
This starting point of Tipler, although it doesn't still constitute most among the scientists, it continues opening up step toward what is already guessed as a deep change of mentality. However, being a here "glance to the future", would not it be outside of the context what we have just read?.
For all those colleagues of Tipler that are atheistic or agnostics and that they consider that such ideas correspond to a last moment "fewer evolved" of the western humanity, happily overcome by the development of the sciences and the modern technologies, it is certain that yes.
But the truth is that we can make it. Without going farther and staying in the scientific land, the new quantum physics contributes its own argument to the objection (agreeing with to the mystics and the theology of the religions that sustain the pre-eminence of the instant in passing).
The life - the doctor Kademova says - it is semajante to a book that you could thumb through back, forward or to notice a page, so those conventional notions that we have inherited of uns lineal, irreversible, progressive and progressive entido of the history and of the facts, in sum, of "past", "present" and "future" they are only the reader's that reads the volume subjective appreciations.
In the sentence that of the professor Tipler finishes being written down they appreciate, at least three fundamental details.
The first one that the science returns to the culture in which had not still broken up with the religion; second that the scientist and the theologian are related intellectual and methodologically (in theory of the knowledge or epistemología); and third - the question in my more valiant opinion of those formulated for the times that they run - that the science, the reason, the experience, the logical deduction, are they located in the sacred space to the service of the divine thing and of their intan-gibilidades, being able to with it "to deduce" (is this, to argue) "the existence of God" and the "resurrection of the deads" or the sky, after having them "done see" or "sensed. does the science Advance looking for its rear-view mirror - to use an idea of McLuhan?
For the prevailing and orthodoxly progressive thought this shading applied to the modern science is a heresy, because reactualiza "old memories" that were already believed conquered.
However, until the own Copernicus (with its "revolutionary helium-central theory") he went aware that when throwing their hypothesis in the XVI century it rescued a knowledge that it had already been managed, considered and "rejected" for the ago two thousand year-old old astrología/astronomía.
With that that, as well he said in 1539, their pupil, Rheticus, Copernicus didn't make with his theory more than "to recover" an old knowledge already known by our primitive ancestors.
THE ABOLISHED RELIGION FOR A MACHINE
Let us reconsider before anything the following thing. Let us see. The call modern science is daughter of the separation. Being more necessary: the "classic science", positivista, and their heiress the technology - knowledge and application - they are the result of the analysis and to continue of the distinction, after the division, of the division or partition, after the distancing and of the exclusion, among spirit and matter, soul and body, sky and earth, mystery and transparency, visible and invisible, life and death, symbol and reality, supernatural and natural, macrocosms and microcosms, entirety and it leaves, unit and the being's multiple states, revelation and logic, fellow and object...
The process concludes, naming a primacy that spreads to deny and to forget to its contrary one, erecting it finally as value and source of all power. He to say which of this polarity it is the elect of the science and modern technology.
To continue - already isolated the value (matter, body, earth, etc.) - he repeats the same described treatment, distin-guiendo, separating, leaving, specializing, jerarquizando, in sum "rationalizing" the lit System, with what everything is definitively broken, in fragments, and the unit - the main of the divine attributes - conquered.
It is necessary to clarify, therefore that the modern science doesn't have its roots neither between the magicians or chamanes, neither among the poets, mystics or sages of the antiquity for who, acceptando like vital experience the unitary thing, these dualities don't make sense.
Another matter is the essential difference between magic and religion, of what we will speak in another occasion. For the time being - among the coincidences - we say that for them the existence is holistic that it operates globally, as if the spirituality was not conceivable without corporeidad and the incarnation was not possible without the spirit.
Yes, on the other hand, this science of which we speak here finds a remote parentezco in those incipient philosophies of thinking western that, accepting and recognizing the dualism body-soul (Socrates, Plato, Aristotle), they began to speculate on him and to establish categories, differences and localizations...
When Heisenberg, one of the parents of the quantum physics, refers to here to the "superación" of the platonic and Aristotelian mentality, the attitude of the new science before the present world contains something more than a light critic: he is intending their complete moving.
Pointed it is. But, without leaving so far, the question now is this: In what moment does the scientist breakaway of the religion?
During the antiquity and the Half Age, the alchemist discriminated against and the things, and the theologian cut, of these and other later times until the current times, he added to the menciada task too well that of explciar the distinticón between the natural thing and the supernatural thing; nevertheless, and although such activities could be considered "among-tenimientos dangerous" or at least chancy, neither the alchemist neither the theologian could still be crossed out as scientifically modern, since although "they crumbled" the creation and "they classified" their elements, accidents and operations, tornaban then to reunify the dispersion to the one and to the origin, to the divine thing, immediately.
Characters still as Paracelso (1490-1541), for the one who the movement of comets was "signs" celestial of the spirit, and it stops who the stars, the nature and its invisible inhabitants (fairies, silfos, goblins, gnomes... in whose real presence believed), the angels and the hobmres, all, were interrelated and imbricaban inquebrantablemen-you; or as the German astronomer Kepler (1571-1630) in whose conception of the science God intervenes in the world with "signs", make ("spiritual beings of the cosmos"), new stars, to which the same meaning should be given that received among the old ones; or I eat, even, the same Isaac Newton (1642-1727), qualified by Keynes: "the last of the magicians" that still believed in the proximity of the dragons (it looked for them in the Swiss mountains) that was alchemist that was convinced as the Greeks of Homero that the human destination was controlled by the invisible thing that was seen itself as a magus intervening between God and its creation that, in definitive, it sustained how the physical facts - and not only people - they had a connection with the Providence, with the demons or other beings of the supernatural nature...
The three, Paracelso, Kepler and Newton, they are in the fair frontier among the traditional science and the science that he begins to breakaway of the sacred thing. Paracelso and Kepler have their two feet to the other side of the line; Newton, on the other hand, has one "there" and the other one "here". Of there his expensive double, his paper of Jano, in the orb of the sciences.
For their side, Galilean (1562 - 1642) he is already a clear predecessor from the scientific modernity when sustaining that the universe is a vitalismo that works by itself (lukewarm precedent of the mecanicismo); and that "the fall of the bodies - he will end up saying - it would be valid although there was not God."
Preparing the land will also be the mathematician's philosophy and dreamer you Discard (1596 - 1650) that will dominate the whole century of the XVII one, arriving until Kant. For the dualist you Discard neither the animal already has soul neither the world mystery: they are, concisely, machines.
A step nothing else had until the official publication and letter of nature of the Physical Mechanic's birth favored by the Royal Society of London.
The England of the XVII and XVIII centuries will be this way - in words of Francis Hutchinson - the first country to which fit him the honor of having broken up with the superstition magic-nun.
In 1703, Isaac Newton, already ennobled, president of the Royal was designated Society, position that showed until his death. In the breast of the Society, Newton gave to know his studies on the mechanics of the bodies and of the universal gravitation.
And it was there, where, before their official communication, one of the pupils of Newtor intervened - John Machine (Juan Machine!) - convincing the teacher so that in the official formulation of their law of the graveness it obviated "those real connections" with the mysterious and invisible, with the spiritual and divine so inserparables up to now of the scientific Newton, so that - according to Machine (!) - they didn't fall on the discoverer the blemish, hazmereir and sorcerer's insult, magician and the intellectual "trickery crime."
es tu BUSCADOR favorito, úsalo aquí
