Fick en länk till en mycket intressant artikel i New York Times om förhållandet mellan tro och vetenskap.
Där förutspås en utveckling där vetenskapen slår armkrok med mystiken - och lämnar de religiöst bokstavstroende till att föra en alltmer tynande väderkvarnsfajt.
Här ett kort utdrag ur artikeln:
"In their arguments with Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins, the faithful have been defending the existence of God. That was the easy debate. The real challenge is going to come from people who feel the existence of the sacred, but who think that particular religions are just cultural artifacts built on top of universal human traits. It’s going to come from scientists whose beliefs overlap a bit with Buddhism.
In unexpected ways, science and mysticism are joining hands and reinforcing each other. That’s bound to lead to new movements that emphasize self-transcendence but put little stock in divine law or revelation. Orthodox believers are going to have to defend particular doctrines and particular biblical teachings. They’re going to have to defend the idea of a personal God, and explain why specific theologies are true guides for behavior day to day. I’m not qualified to take sides, believe me. I’m just trying to anticipate which way the debate is headed. We’re in the middle of a scientific revolution. It’s going to have big cultural effects."
Spännande tankar...
Har han möjligen rätt? Vad tror ni?
Själv tror jag inte att detta, om det besannas, behöver betyda att man överger tron på en personlig Gud. Men att det kommer att påverka de religiösa systemen är ganska givet....Etiketter: andlighet, ateism, fundamentalism, kyrkan, Neural Buddhism, religion, vetenskap |
