Part of the pushback against religion, it seems to me, is based on the fear that there might be something rational to it after all. Sorry to get all philosophical on you on a Saturday morning, but the idea has been bothering me all week. You see, reductionist thinking has already concluded that religion is “emotion” and science is “reason,” and only the latter has any validity. When’s the last time you met somebody and asked “How are you thinking?” instead of “How are you feeling?” Neurologists are finding that reason and emotion can’t be divided with a scalpel; indeed, healthy thinking involves both, not reason alone. Funnily, this is a natural conclusion of evolution—we evolved to survive in this environment—our brains developed rational faculties to enhance emotional response, not to replace it.
I know this is abstruse; go ahead and get a cup of coffee if you need it. What if emotion participates in reality? How can emotion be measured outside of individual experience? We experience it all the time without thinking about it. From the earliest of human times we’ve had religion in the mix, in some form. Perhaps we are evolving out of it, but perhaps neurology is telling us that there’s something to it after all. Something immeasurable. Chaos theory can be quite uncomfortable in that regard—every coastline is infinite, if you get down to nano-divisions. When you measure something do you use the top of the line on the ruler or the bottom? Or do you try to eyeball the middle? And how do you do it with Heisenberg standing behind you saying there’s always uncertainty in every measurement?
Absolute reality is beyond the grasp of creatures evolved to survive in a specific environment. Religion, in some form, has always been there to help us cope. Yes, many religions mistake their mythology for fact—a very human thing to do—but that doesn’t mean that emotion has nothing to do with rational thought. It seems that instead of warring constantly maybe science and religion should sit down at the table and talk. Both would have to agree on the basic ground rule that both are evolved ways of coping with an uncertain environment. And both would have to, no matter how grudgingly, admit that the other has something to bring to that table. Rationality and emotion are entangled in brains whose functions are simple survival. Pitting one against the other is counterproductive, even on a Saturday morning.