I published an article ‘A Scientific View of the God Delusion and its Implications‘ online at Nirmukta in July 2009. The drafting of this article (started long ago) was spread over a few months, and I had completed the writing by June 2008. I had emailed it to a large number of my colleagues and friends, mostly scientists, inviting their reactions. I present here a summary of over one year of data collection regarding their responses. I list the responses in a decreasing order of frequency.
1. Stony silence. This was the most frequent response. Or: ‘Oh, I just could not find time to read it fully.’ I could notice a sense of embarrassment in some cases, perhaps because my article has the statement that, personally, as a scientist I should do nothing that insults the spirit of the scientific method. And they all know what the scientific method demands.
2. ‘No matter what you say, there is a power up there.’ I have already dealt with this attitude in great detail in my article.
3. ‘There are things about life and the universe that I am incapable of understanding.‘ This reaction came from some of the very bright scientists, and was also an expression of their humility. I can understand that many of them strongly believe that science has only a limited domain of applicability, and that the God concept lies outside that domain. I do not agree with this, and the onus is on them to argue why they think so. They are scientists, and must argue why they think that the God hypothesis is a good hypothesis. They surely know what constitutes a good hypothesis.
4. ‘I am a borderline case.’ I think they are the people who have done very little reading of the rationalist literature. They have not heard of Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Carl Sagan, Steven Weinberg, perhaps not even Bertrand Russell.
5. ‘I am too busy to find time for such things.’ I some cases I could sense the insinuation that, whereas they are busy doing worthwhile things, I have nothing better to do than rake up the God question!
6. ‘Who am I to question the existence of God Almighty?’ This is something remarkable (and very disturbing) that organized religion has been able to achieve. It not only makes statements which must not be questioned, or are falsifiable, it also instils at a very young age the fear of God. Of course, there is an immediate reward for those gentle ’souls’ which accept this: They are labelled as people who are ‘pious’ and humble, and therefore ‘noble’. Organized religion has a self-perpetuating feature.
7. ‘What a refreshing worldview! Thank you very much!’ Such a response was invariably from the younger age-group of Indian scientists.
8. Outright offence. I noticed that such people are mostly from a particular caste.
9. ‘I am a rationalist, but I also care about the sensibilities of my wife.’ There is an important question of parenthood here. They think that it would be difficult for them to instil moral values in their children in a ‘Godless’ home. Now this is a serious issue. The Brights’ Net has taken a major initiative in this regard. Their October 2009 bulletin reads as follows:
‘How well-grounded in current scientific knowledge is The Brights’ Net’s supposition that human morality has natural underpinnings (no recognition of any supernatural foundations)? The Brights’ “Reality about Morality Project” was launched in 2006 to find out. Could we achieve authentication of this supposition by researchers in the field? The four assertions Brights drafted have been reviewed and shaped by seven noted scientists and ethical philosophers, and so we can now issue some scientifically defensible declarations. The statements, grounded in current scientific knowledge, can become a foundation for developing educational materials and media strategies. We want to build a broader understanding of morality first within the constituency. Then, with interested and knowledgeable Brights at hand, we can subsequently turn out attention to educating the general public. Look for a special emailed announcement on this topic in mid-October. By then, final statements and associated “substantiating studies” will have been posted on the website along with a panel-recommended listing of background readings. Any Brights wishing to become better versed in demonstrating that “morality is natural!” will surely be interested in those readings.’
While I look forward to what they are going to announce, I feel that we Indians should evolve our own answers to the question of morality vs. irreligion. I invite readers to come forward with their views.
10. Lastly I want to mention the response of Hindu scientists who said that they are least worried about any possible ‘onslaught’ from rationalism. They pointed out that the Hindu worldview has a place for rationalists also. They say that there are so many ways of ‘realizing’ God, and questioning his existence is one of them. This philosophy is so sure of itself that there is no doubt in the mind of the Hindu that every nonbeliever will end up being a believer! What do you think?
Nonresident Indians (NRIs) face a peculiar situation. They are worried about the morality of their children, particularly daughters, in the ‘wicked West’. Most of them oppose any talk of rationalism, and are convinced that only a religious upbringing is good for the welfare of their children. Readers may like to comment on this.
Another question is regarding the mental state of a person who has, say, recently lost a loved one, or who is suffering from a life-threatening disease at a young age. Where can such an atheist go for a support system? Pantheism (’sexed-up atheism‘) or ‘religious naturalism’ provides some answers.
Albert Einstein
A scientist’s job is to explore and investigate Nature and discover its secrets. In 1998, Richard Dawkins published a book: Unweaving the Rainbow: Science, Delusion and the Appetite for Wonder. I am certain that most scientists are not even aware of this book, which is a pity. In this book Dawkins faces and answers the question: Did Newton ‘unweave the rainbow’ by reducing it to its prismatic colours, as Keats contended? Did he, in other words, diminish beauty? Dawkins’ answer is: ‘Newton’s unweaving of the rainbow led on to spectroscopy, which has proved the key to much of what we know today about the cosmos. And the heart of any poet worthy of the title Romantic could not fail to leap up if he beheld the universe of Einstein, Hubble and hawking. We read its nature through Fraunhofer lines - ‘Barcodes of the stars’ - and their shifts along the spectrum. The image of barcodes carries us on to the very different, but equally intriguing realm of sound (Barcodes on the Air); and then DNA fingerprinting (Barcodes of the Bar), which offers the opportunity to reflect on other aspects of the role of science in society.’ Mysteries do not lose their poetry because they are solved: the solution often is more beautiful than the puzzle, uncovering deeper mysteries.
Richard Dawkins
Carl Sagan was another eminent scientist (an astronomer of great standing) who brought out the same aspect of the scientific worldview. He pointed out that the actual grandeur of the cosmos is far greater than that visualized by any religion.
Carl Sagan
Why is it that most Indian scientists subscribe to the ‘conspiracy of silence‘? Why is it that for many of them a scientific career is just another way of earning a livelihood? They do science in ‘office’ or laboratory, and then go home and forget that they are scientists. Why?
Related posts:
- Indian Rationalist Movement- The Challenges Ahead
- Growing up with Indian Mythology
- The God Delusion in Action: My Indian travelogue.
- Is ‘Hindu Atheism’ Valid? A Rationalist Critique Of The ‘Hindu’ Identity’s Usurpation Of Indian Culture
- Swine Flu Campaign by the Indian Rationalist Organizations
- Sin and the Indian Railways
- BANGALORE SKEPTIC is Reborn as The New INDIAN SKEPTIC Magazine
- COMPLEXITY EXPLAINED: 1. What is Complexity?
Dr Ritz Ali’s post was an eye opner. It provides further evidence that India’s science is not up to standard and still reliant on certification from gods and gurus, astrologers and auspicious days - a clear admission of lack of confidence in one’s own cabilities.
PM Manmohan Singh himself declared at the recent Science Congress that India’s science is “fossilised and bureaucratic, it smothers innovation, lacks relevance to India’s development needs, has poor links to industry and the blame lies with our university departments and research institutions”
He probably utters these banalities every year but nothing changes because no clear blueprint for reform is proposed. It is India’s thinkers who should engage in serious debate on the science crisis and present a seminal white paper for change. They should also discuss the larger issue why India’s elites (Hindus mainly) are still uneasy with rationality and have not come to terms with modernity. They prefer to remain captive to their gods, as Ritz found at the so called premier Bangalore Institute.
Here we have a major obstacle. Does India have great thinkers today? If so, where do they communicate their thoughts? There is a so called Institute of Advanced Studies in Bangalore. What does it do? VS Naipaul told the New York Times in 2005 that India is a large country but it has no thinkers. Could he more damning than that?
In an earlier post, I had wondered why Indian institutions are so inadequate? Not a single Indian university has ever been ranked among the global top 300 but several Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Singapore ones appear in the first 100. Sure India trains many engineers but just about a third of them are employable. Why can’t India invent or innovate?
As long we have tired old politicians like Singh or Mukerjee in charge, little will change, I suspect.
Congrats on your post, Ritz.
George,
I think you have put your finger on what is probably the most ignored set of issues affecting India today. I concur with everything you’ve said except when you said “Not a single Indian university has ever been ranked among the global top 300″. I think you may have been quoting the Jiao Tong University study from last year. Other studies have placed one or two IITs and IIMs (and maybe IISc) in the top 300. Still, no reason to ignore the China study, especially because it is accepted around the world as a very comprehensive study involving multiple variables.
I think the issue is a lot more complex. The pitiable state of higher education is mostly a reflection of the terrible state of primary, middle and high schools in the country. I’ve took a stab at addressing this using my personal experience as a guide here.
That article is only concerned with the problems in the bottom-up forces. I do agree with you that the top-down forces have been severely stifled by the lack of a clear blueprint for the future of Indian education. I suspect that ever so often people attempt to tackle this problem, but the level of bureaucracy, the levels of prevailing illiteracy, the entrenched biases in Indian culture and a political leadership that caters to the lowest denominators in society all conspire to make the task extremely difficult.
I had tackled the terrible lack of understanding of the basic principles of science in India in my article, but on another level, it is the lack of a modern philosophical tradition in India that is appalling. In India philosophy is something that people think of in a derogatory manner. I suspect that most people, even some highly educated ones, are woefully unaware of what philosophy is, and simply think of it as a formalizing of the colloquial use of the word- in the sense of ‘life philosophy’, a set of principles to live by, and so on. Most Indians view philosophy as a waste of time, and place such thinking lower down in order of importance than the trivial technical and arts disciplines that churn out millions of workers to make use of the recent open market-fueled economic opportunities. This is one major reason why there are few thinkers today in a land where, arguably, materialist philosophy was born.
One other point I must make on this subject is the devastating influence of Hinduism on Indian culture. This is a vast topic and I’ve written about it <a href=”http://nirmukta.com/2009/05/11/hinduism-religion-culture-or-way-of-life/”>here and here, but the main points can be summarized as follows.
The progress of a society occurs when the irrational elements of that society can be contained and limited to the more factually irrelevant aspects of the culture of that society. This has been the greatest achievement of the West (and by default, in communist China). Religions are very viral in this regard. They are constantly evolving means to infiltrate culture at large. In India, Hinduism has become synonymous with Indian culture, to a large extent. It refuses to be contained and ends up influencing almost every aspect of Indian society, including areas where it has no business being. For example, read Meera Nanda’s article here to see how the Indian government is deeply entrenched in promoting complete bunkum as science, and how priests and purveyors of superstition receive aid from the government. To take one example, medicine, India leads the world in homeopathy, with enormous amounts of money and the endorsements of powerful celebrities and politicians going into promoting it. This is not to mention our local forms of quackery such as ayurveda and siddha, which, not surprisingly, also receive huge amounts of public funds.
We can go on for hours in this vein. Let me simply conclude by saying that the problems are more deeply entrenched in Indian society itself and it is going to take a very bold national movement to rid our culture of these problems.
Thanks, Ajita Kamal, for your incisive and candid comments. I fully concur with the sentiments in your article of Dec 2008 as well as Meera Nanda’s. It is apparent to me that only clear-thinking people like you can save India from the bureaucrats and growth-rate addicts who run India. They have no larger philosophical and ethical vision because they are averse to intellectual engagment.
I’d like to suggest that Nirmukta stalwarts like Wadhawan,you, Meera Nanda join up with like minded groups like the Rationalist Association of India, Tehelka etc and set up a high profile think tank that produces seminal periodic papers on the state of India’s science and education. Follow it up with a lobby mechanism that can get the ear of modern elites (like Rahul Gandhi and Shashi Tharoor) to develop a culture of critical thinking and rational debate in India.
This is just the germ of an idea from an armchair observer. I am sure others can build and improve on it.
Dear Sir,
I think, I am still not in a position to comment about the scientists everywhere. Though my experience in France and Germany doesn’t make a good case of scientists divorced from religion and, thus, God.
I would like to know your opinion about “intellectual dishonesty” that I mentioned in the last para of my comment.
Dear Sir,
I indeed feel myself lucky enough to come across this article, and through it the one whose follow-up is this. The questions that you raised in the last para are such that would make the most Indian, so-called, scientists and academicians in science and technology feel awkward, I thought reflexively. On second thought, I think even that wouldn’t happen. For it is indeed nothing but just another way of earning livelihood. So the question of delving into what Science is all about doesn’t arise in the first place! Rather, they are exemplary of the extent men-of-Science could be devoid of reason.
I think, with little scrutiny it wouldn’t be difficult for one to see that actions-disconnected-with-beliefs is quite common a phenomenon in Indian context. Not only so-called scientists subscribe to it, but social scientists, “intellectuals”, “liberals”, “broad-minded”, … and all that in-vogue tags that people take aid of to decribe themselves, do the same — their words (lip service which they are adept at!) hardly translate into action; let alone beliefs, a matter of faith, and thus considered blasphemous to be questioned or even to any subjection to objectivity!
I have had the ‘privilege’ to be associated with Indian Institute of Science, bangalore, for almost nine years. This is a place about which you would only read “nice” stories in newspapers and stuff… Perhaps because the real state of affairs never go over the wall ’systematically constructed’ and ‘conspiratively maintained’ by a certain section that has been historically associated with Science in India. No wonder, ironically though, this place provides an epitome of, what you rightly pointed, “They do science in ‘office’ or laboratory, and then go home and forget that they are scientists.” In fact, even in laboratories this science is pursued with the much sought after blessings by putting ‘red tilaks’ on computers, garlanding machines in workshops and offering pujas on certain ‘auspicious’ days. And with all this the men-of-science (read members of the faculty here) maintain “conspirative silence”. The lack of rational thinking, openness and scientific & objective outlook towards day to day matters be better left unsaid! …
I think, all the concerns that you raised and our observations about the Indian society, in general, brings out a singular issue of intellectual dishonesty that has engulfed not only people in Science, but Social Sciences, Politics, NGOs, etc. After all, we know, how contrary the ‘words’ of Indian intelligentsia are to their deeds in the socialite evenings of Delhi. …
Regards,
Dr. Rizwaan Ali
Fraunhofer Institute
Germany
Dear Dr. Ali:
Thank you for your comments. You have a German address. I am wondering how the scene there differs from that in India. What has been your experience in Germany?
I am of the view that, when it comes to the question of God, Indian scientists are not a species apart. They are no different from scientists elsewhere.
Number 9 (the wife gambit) used to be the favourite of supposedly non-believing Kerala Marxists a while ago. They didn’t believe, of course, but went through rituals for the sake of their wives!
One of the major issues involved seems to be that Indians are more bound to family and community for practical reasons. We need them to help when things aren’t going perfectly well, monetarily and otherwise. Therefore, it is not easy to reject the outward trappings of belonging to a particular religion - it’s more a badge of belonging to a support group than a genuine belief. In more evolved societies, especially the European ones, individuals get similar support from society as a whole, rather than their family or community. America is an exception, their tradition of individualism has failed them there.
Perhaps that’s why Europe has a low belief rate and America has a high one?
If this hypothesis is correct, then we need to work to gradually create social support systems that transcend family and community barriers so that people can rid themselves of these unnecessary badges of belief.
It is probably true that the number of female rationalists is less than the number of male rationalists. It is also true that a child is influenced more by the mother than the father in the early years of its life. If the rationalist movement is to gain strength, ways should be found for curbing or preventing the early brain-washing and indoctrination of children regarding the supposed ‘importance’ of religion. I think the activists of the women’s liberation movement have perhaps never highlighted the need to liberate women from the clutches of irrational belief. I wish some women rationalists will come forward and join our discussion here.
Thanks, Mr. George, for the comments.
1. I agree with you that we should not be comparing ourselves with Pakistan. I mentioned Pakistan in the context of the democratic route India chose under Nehru s leadership at a critical juncture in our history.
2. Rationalism flourishes best in a democracy. But democracy alone is not enough. Look at the USA. They are a democracy. But they also have the highest concentration of Creationists in the West.
3. And now about China. They have chosen not to be very democratic. Perhaps India has too much of democracy, and that has slowed down our progress compared to China s.
4. Slow progress or not, I do take pride in our democratic set up. It is more humane.
5. Corruption is slowing down our progress. The question is: How to tackle corruption ruthlessly in a truly democratic system? Not easy.
6. Religion is another factor which is holding us back. Here again, China has an advantage. As an ordinary citizen proud of my heritage, I am doing my bit to loosen the stranglehold of irrational beliefs on the Indian psyche. I have full faith in the young generation.
Many thanks for kindly emailing me the reply to my comment.
Of course. comparison with Pakistan, a failed state, does buoy up Indians. But Pakistan is just a quarter of India’s area and has a sixth of its population. A fairer comparison would be with China and that would hardly cheer Indians.
Dr W, given India’s dismal record over 60 years (compared with say China or S Korea), you say you are proud to be Indian. On what grounds do you base this pride?
As for America, you will agree that its scientific prowess is amply evidenced by its great universities and stunning achievements in science and technology. Could this be accomplished without a dedicated application of rationality?
I am aware too that, while Indians have their gods and gurus, many ordinary Americans are plagued by weird beliefs and intolerance attitudes.
With due regards to all the contributors. I think & feel we should keep our comments with details focused on the “Scientists and God: The Indian Scenario” & main related article “A Scientific View of the God Delusion and its Implications” so that the aim with which the article has been written i.e. to make people & the coming generation evaluate them self’s the main issue & choose the right path rather than just go for bind faith.
On Oct 12, Dr Wadhawan said: “India can be proud of her democratic traditions, and can justifiably thank Nehru for this. Nehru, our first Prime Minister, was a rationalist. India has a formidable workforce of trained scientists and engineers.”
Some caveats are called for in this statement. India’s democracy has borrowed the trappings (such as voting rights for all) from the West but the spirit of the ideology is glaringly missing. Voters cast their ballot mechanically but do they or the parties choose the representatives? Are the candidates vetted for their moral fibre and debating skills? Are they accountable to those who voted them in? How come some 100 MPs have criminal records and many more who are millionaires?
I therefore submit that India has just the veneer but not the substance of democracy.
As for Nehru, his talents, writing skills and vision were all honed in England where he was educated. His homeland could confer no intellectual resources on him. He candidly admitted that England had made him. Isn’t sad that even now Indians can’t excel until they have academic training in the West? Why are Indian institutions so inadequate? There is not a single Indian institution has ever been ranked among the global top universities but several Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Singapore ones appear in the first 100. Sure India trains many engineers but just about a third of them are employable. Why can’t India invent or innovate?
Would be unfair to assert that India elites generally have not yet come to terms with modernity and have not excelled at critical thinking and rational analysis?
After Independence, Nehru was to India what Jinnah was to Pakistan. And just look at the two countries now.
Nehru was only one of the factors. There is something about we Indians which has made India what it is today.
I am a proud Indian, and proud to be Indian. How rational is America, you think? Ask Richard Dawkins.
I think that the Hindu view of God is different from the law-giving creator-God of Abrahamic religions. I myself think of Ishvara as merely a deification of “ultimate reality” (Brahman), which is a completely natural concept. This is supposedly the same as the soul (Atman), or the ultimate witness within. Thus Krishna (for example) is just the idea of ultimate reality that is ascribed a personality. It’s all just nature worship taken to its logical conclusion - instead of worshiping the Sun, Ganga, Himalayas, Sindhu etc., you worship “everything” as Ishvara.
Hinduism (at least for me) falls in the same category as art or music.
I feel the articles and the discussions there off may help the generation to come, to analyze the matter, the aim with which the original article “A Scientific View of the God Delusion and its Implications” has been written. A part of my feelings on the subject matter which I was able to pen down on 17th Aug 2009 are there in the comments portion under the original article “A Scientific View of the God Delusion and its Implications”.