Science
in Christian PerspectiveScience
in Christian Perspective
Notes on "Science and the Whole Person" A Personal
Integration of Scientific
and Biblical Perspectives
Part 4
Pseudo-Science and Pseudo-Theology:
(A) Cult and Occult
RICHARD H. BUBE
Department of Materials Science and Engineering
Stanford University Stanford, California 94305
From: JASA 29
(March 1977): 22-28.
The prefix "pseudo" means counterfeit. The evaluation of
authentic science
and authentic theology cannot be made fully unless it is realized
that there are
counterfeit forms in the world, and unless the characteristics of
these counterfeit
forms are recognized. An investigation of pseudo-science and
pseudo-theology reveals
an intimate relationship between them.
Pseudo-Science and Pseudo-Theology
Pseudo-science is an activity that looks like science, uses the terminology of
science, claims the authority of science, but at a fundamental level violates
the basic integrity of a scientific activity. The mark of a counterfeit is that
it closely resembles the authentic. So also pseudotheology is an activity that
looks like belief in and worship of the true God, uses standard or
invented theological
terms and categories, claims to fulfill the needs and to take the
place of authentic
theology, but at a fundamental level violates the basic integrity of theology
and turns out to be only a human enterprise. Since "theology" cannot
be discussed in this context in abstract terms, I state as my own
definite presupposition
that authentic theology is to be identified in terms of the Christian faith as
defined by the Biblical revelation. It is in terms of this presupposition that
I work out the remainder of this installment. "Authentic science" has
been described in previous installments.
The judgment that a particular activity is one of pseudo-science or
pseudo-theology
is not one easily made by a person who is not intimately conversant
with authentic
science and Christian faith. The intricacy and ingenuity of the counterfeit in
these fields is no less than the misdirected artistry devoted to the production
of counterfeit money. It is often not possible, given limited
resources and time,
to demonstrate in detail the fallacies and aberrations of the counterfeits in
the fields of science and theology. I have received, for example, from time to
time whole books of mathematical argumentation seeking to prove all kinds of things from unorthodox theories of
cosmogony, to basic errors in Einstein's theory of relativity, to
simple and classical
substitutes for quantum mechanics, to grandiose models for description of the
world in terms of concepts and models imported from philosophy,
politics or religion.
To sit down and attempt to unravel the errors in these arguments would take an
immense effort. There is, however, a basic flavor to pseudoscience or
pseudotheology
that one deeply involved in authentic science or theology can usually
detect without
detailed analysis of the argument. There are certain critical test points that
pseudo-science or pseudo-theology always fail to match.
In scientific circles practitioners of pseudo-science are called such things as
"crackpots" or "quacks." In religious circles practitioners
of pseudo-theology are called "fanatics" or "heretics." The
connotations of the terms are quite similar in both fields. Generally
the heretic
is one who departs from the orthodox position by departing from the
faithful exercise
of the discipline that guides and guards orthodoxy. Historically
occasional cases
exist where men labeled "crackpots" and
"heretics" have later
been accepted as men of vision ahead of their times, but these are
the exceptions
that prove the rule: for every one of them there are thousands of
pseudo-scientists
and pseudo-theologians whose ideas have no validity beyond their own
conceptions.
The major breakthroughs in scientific and theological understanding have come
from men and women who had a thorough grasp of the fundamentals of
their discipline;
This continuing series of articles is based on courses given in the Undergraduate Special Seminar Program at Stanford University, at Fuller Theological Seminary, and at Regent College, Vancouver, B.C. Part 1, "Science Isn't Everything" appeared in March (1976), p. 3337. Part 2, "Science Isn't Nothing" appeared in June (1976), p. 82-87. Port 3, "The Philosophy and Practice of Science" appeared in September (1976), p. 127-132.
seldom if ever do such breakthroughs come as the resuit of the
efforts of amateurs
or dilettantes.
In his book Physicist and Christian, William Pollard' describes the intuitive
apprehension of pseudoscience in the area of physics.
In my own held of physics it is a common experience to receive
privately published
papers which develop all kinds of strange and bizarre theories about everything
from the electron to the universe as a whole . . . . To the non-physicist they
have as bona fide a ring as a paper in the Physical Review. But to physicists
they are immediately recognized as fundamentally different. They constitute in
the strict sense of the word unorthodox or heretical physics. In
subtle ways impossible
to describe clearly to the world at large, they violate everything
which has given
the physics community power to slowly and painfully acquire real and dependable
insights into the nature of things.
Such practitioners of pseudo-science or pseudo-theology generally believe that
they have discovered or been provided with some special key to understanding,
unshared by members of the "establishment." They are not willing to
enter into careful and scholarly discussion with representatives of orthodoxy,
but separate themselves into self-contained and carefully guarded
enclaves where
support for the pseudo-position can be constantly reinforced by
elaborate publication
and educational procedures. (As a peripheral observation, I have
noted that almost
every writer in extreme pseudoscience or pseudo-theology is prune to
the capitalization
of many words in the attempt to emphasize the "key" nature
of his position.)
If practitioners of pseudo-science frequently neglect all areas of evidence or
physical laws that would contradict their conclusions if considered properly,
practitioners of pseudo-theology are essentially unanimous in their rejection
of the Biblical doctrine of the Trinity and of the deity of Jesus
Christ. (I address
myself here particularly to cults which claim a Christian heritage
but have forsaken
Christian integrity.) I cannot say that there are no cults that are faithful to
these cornerstone Biblical teachings, but certainly every major cult
can be characterized
immediately by the formulation invented to avoid these fundamental doctrines.
Likewise every major cult is in agreement, contrary to Biblical teaching, (and
here we can include most of the world's great religions as well) that
"salvation"
is ultimately through knowledge and by "right action" based on that
knowledge. To include Eastern religious thought, one may wish to substitute the
word "enlightenment" for "knowledge," but the thrust is the
same.
In the remainder of this installment, I consider some of the characteristics of
specific cults in order to illustrate and develop these concepts of
pseudo-science
and pseudo-religion and of how they are frequently used to reinforce
one another.
Sampling the Universe: Forms of Fatalism
One set of cults claims to be neutral with respect to worldview, philosophy or
religion, and claims therefore that it is possible to hold any
religious or philosophical
position at the same time that one is a faithful cultist. The members of this
set of cults that essentially sample the universe for guidance are as ancient
as human records. They have apparently existed at all times of
recorded history.
The mark of a counterfeit is that it closely resembles the authentic.
These cults believe that the disposition of our lives is partially or totally
determined by forces beyond our control, but that the fate determined by these
forces can be known to us through apparently unrelated observations. By knowing
our proper place in the universe, we may then take what advantage is possible
of this special knowledge to improve our lives and situation in the world. The
forces beyond our control may be wholly impersonal, as in astrology, palmistry,
reading tea leaves, casting sticks or coins in I Ching, or various forms of the
ancient arts of discerning the future by inspection of the entrails of birds or
the livers of animals (hepatoscopy). Or these forces may have aspects
of personality
as in spiritualism, witchcraft and Satanism. These latter do involve religious
expressions of their own, whereas the former could be religiously neutral.
Consider astrology as a specific example of an ancient and currently
repopularized
cultic expression. The evaluation of astrology depends upon what one
really believes
that it is; although it is not essential that astrology be
intrinsically anti-Christian,
it seems in practice to become so in most cases. For most devotees, astrology
assumes the form of both a pseudoscience and a pseudo-religion. Certainly the
Biblical assessment of astrology is negative in that historical context (e.g.,
Daniel 2:27; Isaiah 47:13,14).
If astrology had a basis in fact, it could be an indicator of human
characteristics
and potentialities such as are given by studies of the effects of heredity and
environment on human beings, or by studies of psychological
preferences and facets
of human personality. If astrology had a basis in fact, therefore, Christians
could regard it properly as one more way to understand the nature of
the created
world, and it would of necessity have no more antiChristian impact
than the study
of genetics. For those who accept astrology, on the other hand, it
seems empirically
that such a neutral approach is seldom followed. It seems much more common for
astrology to become the principal focus of life, with
"traditional religion"
relegated to a secondary and peripheral role in deciding choices and actions.
It is necessary, therefore, to distinguish between what might be the
case if astrology
were a real science, and not a pseudoscience coupled with a
pseudo-religion, and
what is the case with devotees of astrology.
On the other hand, if astrology has no basis in fact, it is nothing
short of foolish
to pay any attention to it, or to regard it as indeed supplementary
to understanding
gained from genetics and psychology. As to whether astrology is an
authentic science
or a pseudo-science, I must personally conclude that it is an eminent case of
the latter. To argue that the planets have dominant effects on our personality,
metabolism, and health, not to mention our success, wealth, sex-life,
wish-fulfillment
etc., and to couple this argument with the admission that we really don't know
how they have this effect, adds up for me to a position that can be
accepted only
on faith with little regard for any objective evidence. Not only is
the position
non-rational, but it is basically irrational since its conclusions frequently
contradict other available evidence. Its popularity is correlatahie with a
modern infatuation
for the irrational in reaction against excessive rationalism, as
discussed earlier
in Part 2. When I couple the irrationality of astrology with the
admitted uselessness
of daily newspaper horoscopes and the realization of the vast
business potential
in the astrology area, I am confirmed in the conclusion that
astrology is a pseudo-science.
When I recognize in addition the subtle ways in which faith in
astrology can replace
faith in the living and loving God, I feel justified in regarding it
as a pseudo-religion
as well as a pseudo-science. Actually, an investigation into the
religious perspectives
of astrologers usually reveals a dimension of pantheism or Eastern
mysticism regarding
the Unity of all things, of which the planetary motions may be only a
relatively
unimportant manifestation.
The Key to Health and Success: Neo-Gnosticism
Gnosticism was a philosophico-religious movement that pre-dated Christian times
but continued on afterwards, in which the main conviction was that
"salvation"
or "emancipation" came through knowledge (Greek, gnosis)
which was able
to deliver the special possessor of this knowledge from the
constraints of matter.
A second group of cults share the claim that their particular founder
had insights
that prove to be the key to a healthy and successful life; these
cults may therefore
be considered to be modern examples of gnosticism, or of
neo-gnosticism. In each
case the founder has lived in the past 200 years and has written prolifically.
Each stresses in its own way that "salvation" comes through
knowledge;
knowledge of that particular key which had been hidden and is hidden still from
all who do not participate in the cult. L. Ron Hubbard (1911- ) discovered the
principles of "dianeties" and his discovery has grown into the Church
of Scientology. The teachings and beliefs of Jehovah's Witnesses are based to
a large extent on the writings of Charles T. Russell (18521916) and his style
of biblical interpretation and extrapolation. Christian Science is founded on
the book by Mary Baker Eddy (1821-1910) whose textbook dominates
Christian Science
thought: Science and Health, with Key to the Scriptures. Mormonism
came into being
with Joseph Smith (18051844) who claimed to translate the golden
plates delivered
to him by an angel and produced the "keys" of the Latter Day Saints:
the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and The Pearl of
Great Price.
Of this group of four cults of the neo-gnostic type, the Church of Scientology
is the most openly nonChristian. At its best Scientology advocates
and practices
a number of techniques that may have a practical psychological effect; at its
worst Scientology is a false religion incompatible with the Christian
faith, exhibiting
a mixture of pseudo-science and pseudo-religion. Scientology exalts the role of
knowledge, assumes that knowledge leads to wisdom, and that wisdom
leads to salvation.
Scientology openly presents itself as being in a long line of
"wisdom"
religions: religions that claim special insight able to deliver the initiated.
In Scientology the claim is made for the application of the scientific method:
what works is right. This pragmatism is both appropriate and useful
for the application
of the scientific method, but it is also one of the chief limitations of that method as a
universal principle of life, as we have discussed in Part 1. The
truth is pragmatic,
but what is pragmatic in the short range need not be the ultimately true.
It is unfortunate that the cult insistence on the primacy of the cult
"key"
and the cult community makes it virtually impossible to appreciate
authentic science
and theology rather than their pseudo counterparts.
Scientology also grasps at the criterion of "good" provided
by evolutionism,
i.e., good is determined by its survival value. But on what kind of scientific
basis is such a definition derived? It cannot be scientifically established. Rather
it is a faith assumption that converts what is (what survives) into what ought
to be (what is good). This is no definition of "good" at all, and men
are unable to agree on what survival (or the greatest good for the
greatest number)
really means in the absence of more basic and more ultimate value
presuppositions.
Scientology claims to he compatible with any religious beliefs, and
to interfere
with no religious practice. This can be true only if one's religious
beliefs are
wholly subjective. It seems to be clearly impossible to me to he a
Biblical Christian
and an advocate of Scientology. Scientology teaches that man is innately good
(the basic fallacy of every idealistic neglect of reality); the Bible teaches
that man is by nature in rebellion against God. Scientologists admit
that Scientology
is based primarily on Buddhism, believe that soul or spirit is "that part
of man that is part of Cod," and define sin as "that action
or omission
of action that causes the greatest harm to the greatest overall
portion of life."
Although Scientology is problem oriented and prides itself on
producing solutions
for problems, it is unable to respond to the deepest problems of life except on
a superficial level. The problem of death, for example, is left essentially up
to the individual to work out in his own "religious" way. The problem
of guilt cannot he met by divine forgiveness, for Scentology is
"open"
enough to permit whatever "God and/or Gods or the principle of a first or
prime cause" one might care to believe in. In addition to its
religious errors,
the practical danger of Scientology appears to lie in the financial as well as
the spiritual bondage in which its followers may find themselves
entrapped. With
respect to the high costs of achieving the upper grades of
Scientological standing
(grades of "clearness"), frequently reputed to he in the thousands of
dollar range, Scientologists reply that they attempt to compress all
the benefits
of religion into two years rather than a whole lifetime, and that therefore the
actual cost is only apparently high; the same amount of money
contributed to the
institutional church for a lifetime is required within just two years, but with
guaranteed results by Scientology.
Remarkable resemblance can be detected between Scientology and
Christian Science
in spite of the historical differences in their origin and
formulation. Christian
Science is of course much more biblically oriented, but only insofar
as the Bible
agrees with the system of Mary Baker Eddy. Accepting as the Principle
par excellence
that a perfect Cause must bring forth a perfect Effect, the creation account of
Genesis 1 is taken to demand that since God is perfect, man must be perfect-not
only in creation but today as well. Since Genesis 2 and 3 (and the rest of the
Bible) provide the reasons why man as he now is is not perfect,
Christian Scientists
have no hesitation to dismiss Genesis 2 and 3 as inferior to Genesis
1. The "key"
to health and success in Christian Science is the attainment of spiritual unity
with God and the realization that man is only spiritual and not material. But
the God referred to is not the Cod of the Trinity or of the Bible, but a Divine
Principle which is impersonal. Jesus, in his "material manhood," was
not the Christ. Evil is not real but is the result of our faulty apprehension
of reality. Here Christian Science shows wide overlap with the
emphases of Eastern
religions, as discussed below.
The "keys" to the Scriptures of Mormonism, provided in the writings
of Joseph Smith and of the proclamations of the leader of the Church of Latter
Day Saints to this day, openly claim to be revelation which corrects
and clarifies
the older revelation of the commonly accepted Bible. Mormon study of the Bible
perse
is made all but impossible by an insistence on looking for evidence of missing
portions, altered texts and variant readings in order to justify the works of
Joseph Smith as essential portions of the whole Scriptures. Without
consideration
of the severe scholarly problems in arguing for the authenticity of the Smith
writings as revelation given in "reformed Egyptian hieroglyphics," or
of frequent quotations in these writings from the Bible in its
word-for-word King
James translation (including the errors in that translation), it can be noted
that Mormons reject the Trinity and regard Jesus and the Devil as
spiritual brothers,
and they also consider God to be an exalted man with a physical body.
The Mormon
doctrine of salvation involves not only faith in Jesus, but also
baptism by immersion,
obedience to the teachings of the Mormon church, good works, and the keeping of
the commandments of God as Mormons
Cultic advocates often speak of the scientific demonstration of the validity of a spiritual nature to man. Although this may sound like good news for the religious person, it is usually an extremely dangerous pitfall.
interpret them. Thus the atonement of Christ is not sufficient, but is only a
first step which must be supplemented by human works. Actually all
men, regardless
of beliefs or works, will enjoy some degree of "salvation"
in a hierarchically
structured heaven of which the highest category is Godhead, reserved for the faithful
Mormons who have
fulfilled all the requirements.
Jehovah's Witnesses not only have taken the writings of Charles T. Russell as
guides to interpreting the Bible, but have published their own translation of
the Bible (the New World Translation) with such variants in translation as may
be used to support the Witnesses' doctrines. Jehovah's Witnesses also
reject the
Trinity and the deity of Christ. The atonement of Christ provided the
foundation
upon which the work and obedience of the faithful can he built to enable them
to he among the literal 144,000 of Revelation 7:4; 14:1,3 to enter
the established
kingdom. Christ has already returned secretly and invisibly in 1914
and is presently
about the business of setting up his kingdom.
All of these four cults maintain fairly closed communities and are not open to
genuine scholarly interchange or debate with either the scientific community or
the Christian community. They involve many sincere and well-intentioned people
who are desperately seeking for some source of security and assurance
in our tension-ridden
day. It is unfortunate that the cult insistence on the primacy of the
cult "key"
and the cult community makes it virtually impossible for these people
to appreciate
authentic science and theology rather than their pseudo counterparts.
The obvious
hard work of many dedicated cult devotees can he associated with the
cult consciousness
that man's work is the basis for his ultimate position, both in this life and
in the life to come.
Becoming One with the Universe: Eastern Religion
Since the Eastern religions in their classical forms make little
pretense at being
scientific, it may seem inappropriate to include them in a discussion centering
around pseudo-science, or it may seem presumptuous to treat such religions with
their long history and millions of adherents under the category of
pseudo-religion.
On the other hand, we have already seen above the influences of
Eastern religious
thought on astrology,
Scientology and Christian Science, We are also living
in a day in which interest in the Eastern religions is at a new high
in the Western
world, and many cultic forms do manifest aspects of pseudo-science
and pseudo-religion
of relevance to us.
Not only do the Eastern religions agree with other cults in rejecting
the Trinity,
the deity of Jesus Christ, and the biblical revelation of reconciliation with
a personal God by grace through faith, but they reject even the
biblical doctrine
of Creation, which forms the implicit base for so much of Western
thought. Unless
this rejection of the doctrine of Creation is realized to be at the
heart of Eastern
religious thought, any understanding of it is impossible. Eastern
thought fairly
generally treats the acceptance of matter as the cause of evil, and the effort
to preserve the individual as the cause of moral failure. Man does
evil according
to Eastern thought because he is finite, limited, individual and conscious of
self as reality; he can be delivered from this bondage only by withdrawing from
finiteness, limitations of space and time, handicapping illusions of
individuality,
and destructive self-consciousness into the great Unity of
unindividuated reality.
The method of withdrawal usually involves some form of meditation and obedience
to discipline: to the
Scientifically demonstrable results described in a particular religious context cannot be taken as evidence that that context is thereby verified.
acquisition of knowledge, not by the Western method of "study," but by
the Eastern method of "satori," sudden nonrational enlightenment. The
biblical doctrine of creation takes seriously the pronouncement of God that the
universe, according to his creation purpose, is good, and that evil
which we see
around us today is not the inevitable consequence of the structure
of' the created
universe (with its finite, limited, selfconscious individuals), but
is the result
of human moral rebellion against God. Moral rebellion has little meaning within
Eastern thought; unless we perceive that God is us, and that we are
God-that all
is God and that we are all, we are blinded by the limitations of
appearances and
fail to grasp the Unity of reality.
The methods of meditation and discipline may cover a wide range within Eastern
thought from the devotion to the eightfold way of conservative Buddhism, to the
short-cut through meditation alone of Zen Buddhism, to the pop
meditation of Transcendental
Meditation for which only a single meaningless word (a mantra)
provided by a guru
needs to be repeated for 15 minutes twice a day to achieve satori,
health, peace,
success and utimatc enlightenment. While recognizing the fallacious theological
foundation of these claims, we should, however, be willing also to
recognize the
possibility of useful natural body and even mind training through such methods.
Eastern religious thought has roots in antiquity and an association
with folkscience
and pseudo-science through the years. Just as folk-science often
provided medical
aid long before medical science understood the cause, and in such cases based
its argument upon fallacious pseudo-science and pseudo-religion, so
we may expect
it to be possible that methods of disciplining body and mind
advocated by Eastern
religions may be effective without confirming the religious premises associated
historically with them. As the treatments of chiropractic may often be useful
for particular ailments (and even more useful than available medical
treatments)
and yet no confirmation is thereby given of the basic philosophy of
chiropractic,
so also we may expect some positive results to be achievable by the practice of
yoga, acupuncture, Transcendental Meditation etc. without providing
any confirmation
of the religious superstructure on which these practices are historically hung.
If we do not make this distinction between the possible beneficial results of
physical and mental discipline and the religions framework within which their
devotees present them, we may well find ourselves in the embarrassing position
of denying scientifically demonstrable results in an effort to avoid supporting
pseudo-religious concepts. This is the kind of dilemma that
Christians have long
been in with respect to the biological theory of organic evolution, and it is
time that lessons learned in that encounter be applied to this field developing
from the background of Eastern religions.
Today a large field is developing on the borderline between pseudo-science and
authentic science with renewed interest in parapsychology, paramedicine, extrasensory
perception, clairvoyance,
psychokinesis and related phenomena. Although these areas could he investigated
purely in terms of natural science (and should he so investigated),
they are most
frequently conceptually tied to a mode of thought derived from the
Eastern religions.
While disagreeing in detail, they agree in general with the claims of
Scientology
and Christian Science that a person in full tune with the universe (a
"clear,"
or one united to the divine Principle) has within himself the ability
to transcend
the limitations of space and time, to burst the bonds of finiteness
and individuality,
and to propel himself into the All with the ability to exercise the
powers thereof.
Thus the Christian Scientist argues that only failure to achieve the ultimate
apprehension of reality causes Christian Scientists to experience
death; the Scientologist
says, "A person who is Clear has gone beyond the ordinary. He
knows himself.
He understands himself and can fashion his own happiness at will. He
is 'cleared'
of all the obstacles that prevented him from reaching his highest
aspirations."2
Advocates of these positions often speak of their scientific demonstration of
the validity of a spiritual nature to man. Although this may sound
like good news
for the religious person, it is usually an extremely dangerous
pitfall. For what
the advocates of these positions mean is a spiritual nature of man constructed
according to human expectations and not in accord with the biblical revelation,
Dr. James Pike claimed that he had found such scientific evidence for
the existence
of an afterlife through his seance contacts with his dead son, but it
was an afterlife
fashioned after the thoughts of autonomous man and not after the clear word of
biblical revelation. These combinations of pseudo-science and pseudo-religion,
like the others, are an attempt to construct a religious view over
which man has
control, rather than encountering the religious reality over which
God has control.
Christians must be aware, as the biblical record makes clear from the magicians
of the court of Pharaoh (Exodus 7:11,22; 8:7) to the Beast of
Revelation (Revelation
13:13-15), that simple performance of an extraordinary feat does not
authenticate
the philosophy and religion of those who perform it.
Transcendental Meditation
Transcendental Meditation has become a particularly
well-known version of popularized Eastern religious practice, distinguished by
the fact that so many practitioners of TM deny that there is any
religious content
involved. It therefore becomes an interesting test case of the way in
which Christians
should deal with such phenomena. In order to answer the question of whether TM
is a science, a religion, both or neither, answers to a variety of
questions must
be sought.
1. Are there observable phenomena that are real and reproducible?
2. Are these phenomena beneficial or harmful? What criteria should he used to
decide?
3. Do these phenomena have natural causes? Can they he scientifically
described?
4. Do these phenomena have supernatural causes? Is it impossible to
describe them
in natural categories?
5. What is the belief system out of the matrix of
which TM arises?
6. Does the belief system in which TM originates
necessarily hind the practitioner?
7, Can TM be regarded simply as a healthy exercise
(like sleeping or jogging) or as an unhealthy exercise
(such as holding one's breath)?
8. If the phenomena observed have supernatural
causes, what is the agency?
9. Can there be spiritual danger in practicing TM?
An analysis of answers to these questions suggests that TM could be a science,
a religion, both or neither. It could be a science if certain
physiological activity
led to demonstrable and reproducible results. The question is, Does it? There
appear to be definite resuits but it is not clear that they are
uniquely different
from deep rest or sleep. A recent report in Science5 directed toward detecting
physiological and biochemical effects of TM concludes that
"meditation does
not induce a unique metabolic state but is seen biochemically as a
resting state."
Still, TM could be a neutral technique for relaxation.
TM could he a religion if Maharishi's overall perspective and claims for TM are
accepted, and if it is appreciated that initiation into TM and the receiving of
a mantra occur at a religious ceremony, however hidden this may be
from the initiate
not acquainted with the language used.
TM could be both religion and science, if physiological disciplines
with scientifically
describable results were considered to be the ways in which such
religion should
be expressed. There are many testimonies from Christians that their Christian
perception has been deepened by practicing TM.
TM could be neither science nor religion, if it were simply subjective delusion
or deliberately perpetrated fraud.
What then should the Christian learn from all this? Essentially three
things.
1. The religious context of TM cannot be overlooked or forgotten if TM is being
advanced for instruction of the general public. In its present
practices, TM does
require a religious initiation ceremony and is based upon a monistic religious
view of reality.
2. Scientifically demonstrable results described from a particular
religious context
cannot be taken as evidence that that context is thereby verified.
3. Rejection of a religious context for a variety of non-scientific
reasons cannot
be taken as the basis for rejecting the reality of scientifically demonstrable
results coming from that religious context.
If non-Christians are most often guilty of violating 2., Christians
are most often
guilty of violating 3. TM (or something analogous to TM) could probably be just
healthy "exercise." Unfortunately, the probability that
people in general
practicing TM would regard it as simply healthy "exercise"
is not large.
Other Contexts
Although we have been concerned in this installment primarily with those cases
where pseudoscience and pseudo-theology are combined, it should be recognized
that pseudo-science or pseudo-theology can arise also in other contexts. It is
possible, for example, for those who profess an authentic Christian position to
become entrapped in pseudo-science; likewise it is possible for
those who are engaged in authentic science to become entrapped in
pseudo-theology.
The Christian, therefore, needs also to be aware that an orthodox
religious position
does not automatically establish an orthodox scientific understanding, any more
than an authentic practice of science guarantees an authentic
religious interpretation.
Again discrimination is essential. To attack one engaged in pseudo-religion and
authentic science by attacking his science is disastrous; so also is the attack
on one engaged in pseudo-science and authentic theology by an attack upon his
theology. Christians have frequently been guilty of the former, and the world
has often been guilty of the latter. Hopefully Christians will have
learned from
the past not to fall into the same kind of pitfalls as the world.
Summary
Any evaluation of authentic science and theology must recognize that there are
many counterfeit pseudosciences and pseudo-theologies in the world.
Although proponents
of such pseudo-science and pseudo-theology may be sincere and dedicated people,
they are guilty of missing the essence of what it takes for science
and theology
to be authentic. Unfortunately the culture out of which the pseudo-science or
pseudo-theology comes is a closed culture, seeking primarily to reinforce the
characteristic doctrines and to close off openness with
Rejection of a religious context for a variety of non-scientific reasons cannot be taken as the basis for rejecting the reality of scientifically demonstrable results coming from that religious context.
respect to alternatives.
Often pseudo-science and pseudo-theology appear in a context in which
one is used
to reinforce the other. Such efforts can be separated into at least three basic
categories. First, there are forms of fatalism, in which knowledge of
the universe
and its future by means of pseudoscientific approaches often turns ultimately
into a pseudo-religion. Second, there are forms of gnosticism, in which secret
or hidden knowledge is held out as the "key" to health,
success, happiness,
and "being right with God;" this hidden knowledge is
obtained sometimes
by pseudoscience, sometimes by revelation, and sometimes by a
combination of bothin
any ease it is the knowledge itself which "saves." Finally, there are
variations of the theme of the Eastern religions, in which
self-induced transcendence
over matter, finiteness, individuality, space and time, is achieved
by discipline
and meditation; such transcendence returns the separated self to the unity of
the All and hence "saves."
One of the most significant lessons to be learned is that the
practice of science
by an individual need not be intimately related to his religious understanding.
Authentic science and religion should go together; pseudo-science and
pseudo-religion
are often joined. But an authentic religious view can appear to he supported by
pseudo-science, and a pseudo-religious view can appear to be
supported by authentic
science. Discrimination is essential.
REFERENCES
1William C. Pollard, Physicist and Christian, Seabury, Greenwich, Coon. (1961),
p. 21
2Perhaps Happiness: A Scientology handbook, p. 5 (1973)
3R. B. Michaels, M. J.
Huber and D. S. McCann, "Evaluation of Transcendental Meditation
as a Method
of Reducing Stress," Science 192, 1242 (1976)
TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION
1. Perhaps Happiness: A Scientology Handbook defines "Operating
Thetan"
(p. 46) in the following way:
Operating Thetan: a Clear who has been familiarized with his environment to a
point of total cause over matter, energy, space, time and thought, and who is
not necessarily in a body.
Compare with similar ideas in Christian Science and Eastern religions. Is the
concept of "Operating Thetan" a scientific one?
2. Why is the rejection of the Trinity and of the deity at Jesus Christ one of
the hallmarks at every pseudo-Christian cult?
3. If fatalism were really authentic so that "reading the signs
of the future"
could be done to tell what must inevitably happen, what would be the point in
reading these signs in order to be able to change the future? If the future
could be changed by deliberate action, then what "future" was being
read?
4. There are many reasons for arguing that ultimately all things in
the universe
are related. Some fraction of my weight for example is determined by
the furthest
galaxies of the universe. In modern quantum physics we speak of the state of an
entire system, recognizing the interrelatedness of the parts. Does
this mean that
all things are equally interrelated? In fact, does not our everyday ability to
describe events depend crucially on the fact that only a few interrelations are
sufficiently large to be nun-negligible?
Trace the relationship between Gnosticism, idealism, Utopianism, and disillusionment. Discuss the importance of a critical realism to
both authentic science and authentic religion.
6. Examine the following logical argument: a. God is perfect. b.
Everything that
God does is perfect. c. God made man. d. Man must be perfect. c. Man appears to
be imperfect. f. Man's imperfections must be an illusion.
7. Is Buddhist science possible? On what grounds?
8. An article in Scientific American (February 1972) by B. K. Wallace and II.
Benson claims scientific evidence that Transcendental Meditation reduces oxygen
consumption, causes a rapid decline in the concentration of blood
lactate produced
by anaerobic metabolism mainly in muscle tissue, produces a rapid rise in the
electrical resistance of the skin, causes an increase in intensity of
"slow"
alpha brain waves, and produces a decrease in respiratory rate and in volume of
air breathed. TM's proponents often clams that it is related to
neither philosophy
nor religion. On the other hand, TM is practiced by the repetition of
a "personalized"
mantra, which the subject is never permitted to reveal; is alternatively called
"The Science of Creative Intelligence," which is based on "the
major discovery that there exists in every human being the constant source of
intelligence, energy and happiness;" and its founder Maharishi Mahesh Yogi
has been quoted as saying that "theoretically, if everyone practices TM,
the problems of stress, war, and man's inhumanity to man would he
non-existent."
Given this kind of evidence, is TM a science, a religion, a pseudo-science, a
pseudo-religion--or an eclectic mixture of several of these depending on who is
doing what with it?
9. Given the need and the opportunity, would you try acupuncture? If it helped
you, would you attribute religious significance to the outcome and
come to accept
ancient Chinese views of man's relationship to the universe?
OTHER READINGS
J. N. D. Anderson, Christianity and Comparative Religion,
InterVarsity Press, Illinois ( 1970)
R. H. Buhe, The Human Quest: A New Look at Science and Christian Faith, Word,
Texas ( 1971); "Pseudo-Science and Pseudo-Religion,"
Eternity (1974)
M. Gardner, Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science,
Dover (1957)
0. Guinness, The Dust of Death, InterVarsity Press, Illinois (1973)
D. P. Kanellakos and J. S. Lukas, The Psychobiology of
Transcendental Meditation, Benjamin, California ( 1974)
W. B. Martin, The Kingdom of the Colts, Bethany, Minnesota (1965)
W. J. Petersen, Those Curious New Culls, Keats, Coon. (1973)
W. C. Pollard, Physicist and Christian, Seabury, Coon. (1961)
J. W. Sire, The Universe Next Door, InterVarsity Press, Illinois (1976)
J. K. Van Baaleo, The Chaos of Cults, Eerdmans, Mich. (1962)