|
Reply to Anthony Lewis about Reason and Religion |
|
|
In his valedictory column in the New York Times, Anthony Lewis says
good-by, and says, "I see a time of challenge to a basic tenet of
modern society: faith in reason." He writes, "The phenomenon of
religious fundamentalism is not to be found in Islam alone. Fundamentalist
Christians in America, believing that the Bible's story of creation is the
literal truth, question not only Darwin but the scientific method that has
made contemporary civilization possible."
I grew up in a scientific home. My father was America's leading
battery scientist, and was honored with the Navy's highest civilian award
for doubling the battery submarine fleet's cruising power. My two brothers
have medical doctorates and rabbinical training. We are bearded Talmudists,
we believe in Creation and not in Darwin. When we meet, we talk about
physics, psychology, Cabala, Talmud and politics. I think I appreciate
reason as much as the next fellow, and I certainly welcome science and
technological process.
Mr. Lewis promotes "faith in reason." That is an oxymoron.
Faith implies something beyond reason, and reason does not need faith. Mr.
Lewis gave away his hand with this error. He is not a reasonable person. He
has "faith in reason," a humanist religion that imposes the worst
things on reason and liberty. The French Revolution and Communism featured
"faith in reason" accepting first one idea and the next, always
with bloodshed. The French Revolutionary party of Girondists were
slaughtered when their star fell. Before she was killed for belonging to the
party, Mme. Roland called out, "Oh Liberty, what crimes are committed
in thy name!" Mr. Lewis's humanist religion is the most fanatic faith,
and is a direct cousin of the Stalinists who murder millions. Indeed, when
Stalin slaughtered millions of peasants and others, the humanists did not
protest. This, to them, was part of their "faith in reason" that
requires blind belief.
Mr. Lewis might study a bit about the Age of Reason and the French
Revolution. Fundamentalist religion was replaced with the guillotine, and
people's heads were removed because their uncle was a tax collector. At one
point, it was decided to make a statue of a certain actress minus most of
her clothes and worship it as "reason." Unfortunately, that was
the closest humanists ever came to real reason. It is surely more profitable
to worship by looking at a nude woman than it is to worship the
"mystery" of nature revealed by science, which is an oxymoron. How
can a mystery be science?
Mr. Lewis writes, "The phenomenon of religious fundamentalism is
not to be found in Islam alone." He then attacks Fundamentalist
Christians and Jews. Why does he not include other fundamentalist beliefs
such as Stalinism and Maoism? What about the gays who insist on freedom to
infect other people and refuse public health measures?
He adds, "Fundamentalist Christians in America, believing that
the Bible's story of creation is the literal truth, question not only Darwin
but the scientific method that has made contemporary civilization
possible." Steven Gould of Harvard is the leading authority of Darwin
today; he is its icon. Mr. Gould has stated that there is no natural process
of evolution, and that it happened by accident over long periods. He further
stated that if the world were put together again, no life would result. If
so, evolution is not a biological process, it happened despite nature and
the predictions of science. If I don't believe in Darwin, do I deviate from
pure science? Precisely because of these kinds of problems, the Nobel Prize
does not give awards for biology. Indeed, all historical sciences, such as
biology, epidemiology, medicine, archeology, cosmology, psychology and
history are not real science, as they only guess what happened in the past
and do not prove future processes and results. Therefore, when Mr. Lewis
says that Creationists reject the scientific method, he obviously does not
understand science, and certainly, he does not understand evolution and
biology. Mr.
Lewis writes about "the scientific method that has made contemporary
civilization possible." Our civilization is not founded upon a
scientific method. Science can make tools for civilization, but civilization
has a soul. As Oliver Wendall Holmes said, "Civilization is the process
of reducing the infinite to the finite." Only when science and reason
reveal religion do we have civilization. Humanists like Mr. Lewis despise a
literal bible and a religion structured by any but secular and humanistic
terms. They declare a religion of respecting others without any
"reason" to do so. Fundamentalism and the Bible say that
respecting others is reasonable, because G-d demanded it. Mr. Lewis respects
others by whim. Civilization is not safe with secular "whims" as
modern history has proven repeatedly. Mr.
Lewis, after 32 years with the New York Times, is leaving. Perhaps a new
generation of writers will eschew the fanaticism that produced the atheist
media. Then we can talk about reason.
|
|
|
D. Eidensohn's poem
"The Wall" won an International Poetry Contest. His poems appear in
|