{The Great Divide* [continued (5)]}[11th June 1988]

[Redbook5:148A-D][19880611:0000e]{The Great Divide* [continued (5)]}[11^th June 1988]

11/06/1988

[continued]

I am not just knocking Science:** there is an analogy. This close contrast, the union of beginning and end of Science and Mysticism—the two disciplines which I take from New Scientist's own correspondents as the type of rationality and irrationality respectively—suggests that the means, method or "middle" of the two disciplines may not be so far removed as we think. If we ask what is the original guiding light of Western Science--and what motivates many pure Scientists even now—the answer may be idealised as the search for Truth in Harmony, the harmonious workings of the Universe: hence the importance of mathematics, and the preference for simplicity in theories of the organisation of the external world. In a mystical structure, the qualities of Love and Harmony may be linked close together, by Unity, which may be considered as the purest available manifestation of absolute and objective Truth. (This may become clearer if you consider carefully the meanings of the words and their relationships with each other). This suggests the possibility of a corresponding union of the irrational with the rational.

Such a union may not be so far-fetched as it seems. The Scientist's search for harmony in apparent chaos, although it has taken some hard knocks this century, suggests a motivating belief in the ultimate rationality of what appears irrational. Precisely the same belief motivates the Mystic: intuition and inspiration may appear irrational to us, but that is reckoned a symptom of our ignorance (the same ignorance which requires that all applied logic be based on assumptions). It seems intuitively self-evident to this writer that the union in mutual understanding of Rationality and Irrationality could help to heal a divided World. Considered more intellectually, it may be a coincidence that the triumph of Scientific methods has been accompanied by the rise of self-centred materialism, the loss of moral integrity, and (arguably) the decline of the Arts; but it doesn't look like it from here. Specifically, the Scientist who consciously accepts the limitations of his own methods has a far better chance of bringing an influence for good — by the application of a trained and rational intellect to problems of the irrational, without attempting to deny or destroy the irrational — against the undoubted evils capable of arising from both rational and irrational thought. But this depends on a recognition that Rationality is not identical with Good, nor Irrationality with Evil; and an ability to recognise Good and Evil when you meet them in the Market-place. Science cannot do these things; can Scientists?

[…]

11/06/1988

*[Short essay written speculatively for (& not accepted by) New Scientist; see [Redbook5:160-161][19880615:1642f]{Mysticism and Science}[15^th June 1988]]

**[See last previous entry]

[PostedBlogger28for29052018]