Poetry Is . . . (On Science and Religion)

A recent Speaking of Faith program featured Hindu physicist V. V. Raman, a brilliant man with some interesting things to say about the relationship between science and religion. This relationship, for many, is antagonistic. Science threatens religion, some say, and religion often responds blindly and irrationally to what it perceives as a death threat coming from the scientific world.

Raman suggests, however, that science and religion deal with different parts of a single reality, and therefore it's difficult to ask them the same questions. At one point in the program, Raman talks about how in Hinduism two different meanings to "why?" are accepted and understood, allowing science and religion to coexist peacefully:

Ms. Tippett: You make a point in something you've written that reflects an observation I've made, that so much of our cultural debate about science and religion seems to assume that science and religion pose competing answers to the same questions, but, in fact, they pose different questions. And you also note that in Tamil there's a distinction linguistically between 'why' as a causative question, the way science might ask why of a problem, and 'why' as a teleological question the way religion might ask it. I thought that was very interesting.

Mr. Raman: I think it's a very, very important distinction because both kinds of 'why' are important in that the human mind cannot escape those questions. We are intrigued by many…

Ms. Tippett: And we start asking those questions from a very young age, don't we?

Mr. Raman: Very young age. And — but the languages influence sometimes our way of thinking because when we talk as I — again that example, I sometimes ask my students, 'Why are you taking this course?' Some students may say, 'Because it is required in my curriculum'; others may say, 'Because I want to learn what you are going to talk about.' Now, you see, these two answers both are legitimate answers to the same question, but the first answer implies the framework in which the student is operating, the second…

Ms. Tippett: Right. It's kind of a logical framework.

Mr. Raman: …but the second is purposeful and teleological, the second one, 'Because I want to learn.' It's in the future, whereas the first one is because that's how the rules are set up. So both questions are relevant, interesting, except that, as I see it, the question about why in the deeper sense of what is the purpose of this universe — Why am I here? And why was the world created at all? Why are the laws such as they are? — those are very fundamental questions for which we may never be able to find answers which are unanimously acceptable.

Related to this idea, Professor Raman offers an interesting view of the uses of science and religion by using the analysis of poetry as an example:

Mr. Raman: Certainly, I think it is my involvement in physics and the sciences that has given me what I call historical cultural understanding of many of these enormously meaningful things in life, because science, among other things, enables us to look at human events in human terms. Religions, in their context, enable us to look at human events in religious or transrational terms. Both, in a way, are meaningful and illuminating. If you read a sonnet, let us say, science is like the discovery of the rules of prosody, the rules by which the sonnet is constructed, of measure and syllable and accent, iambic pentameter or whatever.

Ms. Tippett: Right.

Mr. Raman: Appropriately, you can analyze a poem and this understanding of the structure of the poem is a significant accomplishment but it tells us nothing about the meaning behind the poem or about the inspiration that the poem might give. And the universe, to me, is somewhat like that. Science enables us to understand the laws and principles by which the universe is constructed, its functions, and that is no trivial accomplishment. And I think that's one of the greatest intellectual achievements of the human mind, is what modern science has been able to do.

But there is always the question of meaning. And while it is possible to derive meaning without going beyond the physical world — and many people do it — it is no less inspiring and fulfilling to find meaning within religious framework insofar as it is not irrational. There's a difference between irrationality and transrationality, and, to me, many of the deeper messages of religions, such as the values it does or must inspire us to, such as caring and compassion and respect for others, helping others, love, reverence. These are not rational — these are not irrational, but these are transrational and they have their sources in the many religious frameworks of humankind. They not only carry the weight of centuries, but they also have something deep in them in the human cultural psyche.

We don't have to be Hindu to profit from thinking like this!