Religion and science, the codification of the invisible

This article answers the following questions (from the ph
ilosophical lookout):-How
did religion appear?-Why did science oppose
religion?-Does it persist religion in
science?-Does religion still bring a
benefit?- What better definitions to religion and science today?

In the human mind the imagination separates itself from reality. The first part of the article looks at what underlies this poetic statement. We need to know a little more about the mind. What neural process does imaginary/reality separation correspond to?

Sensory endings are activated by physical phenomena (heat, contact, light, sound…). Transmission of properties of real objects. It is a communication and not an access to the essence of objects. We do not perceive their intrinsic nature, only what our senses show us. Nevertheless, the communication is objective. There is a proportionality between the ownership of the object and the sensory signal. The realism of the signal is strong.

The signal is associated with others. A representation of the object is constructed by the neural groups. It is an image, a set of merged information. The more complex the image increases, the more likely it is to deviate from the nature of the object. It owns the mind, subjective.

How does she become imaginary? A mental representation is not only interested in the spatial properties of the object but also in its temporal dimension. Different successive aspects of the object keep the same identity. When we look at a barely ripe banana, the representation incorporates the slightly green banana to be tasty (what it was) and the banana become too ripe (what it will be). The temporal dimension of this image is essential in the decision to consume.

There is no limit to the temporal dimension of a representation. The more the prediction extends, the further away one moves away from the 'sedimented' image in the past, the more the representation gains in imagination.

The representations also concern the classes of objects and abstractions. The mind thus easily invents a future where the class contains objects that do not yet exist. Mythical animals such as unicorns, or mathematical entities that have never been associated with real phenomena, appear.

All this forms the imaginary, invisible universe. How do you connect it with reality? In its management of mental representations, the mind tends towards two difficult objectives: the coherences of identity and temporality.

Identity coherence is the separation between self-representation and non-self. Poorly managed it causes a wide variety of personality disorders. Temporal coherence is the separation between the future and the present (a clumped past). Poorly managed it causes a mess in decisions. The judgment of the facts proved or projected is not clear. Destiny is chaotic.

What is a dreamer? He is a person whose mental representations are positioned, in their temporal dimension, preferentially on the future. This is not in itself a mess. The mind knows it's in the future. Its consistency is good. It is only a disorder if he thinks he is in the present.

Dreamers, the most imaginative minds, are very useful to their fellow sads. They share their projections with those who have difficulty building them. Dreamers have the greatest impact on social developments by expanding the temporal dimension of our representations. They are the ones that allow us to codify the invisible universe, the one we have not yet observed.

Dreamers created religions. Here we are. Religions did not fall from heaven. No one has observed the fall of the scriptures. They fell from the spirit of the prophets. And immediately nestled in the imaginations of their companions. This is the remarkable quality of the absence of time closure to our representations. They can bud and create complete alternative universes with their own laws. What are paradises and hells if not the projections of the societies where their designers live?

Showing what can happen, the better and the worst, is the role of religion. Like any prediction, it is idealistic. Not many intermediaries between heaven and hell. Our predictions are not made of half-wishes. It is the proven reality that is nuanced, not our hopes.

Religion, as a codification of the invisible, was absolutely indispensable to humanity. It is impossible to imagine that she could have done without it. No matter that an authentic deity exists, the scriptures had to fall to Earth. It is a direct consequence of the way our minds operate. The function of religion is imperative. The reality of divinity is incidental.

The setbacks came from academic religious, lacking temporal coherence. For these the future is not dissociated from the present. The prediction is already made. Contrary to appearances these people are not mystics. For them paradise and hell are already on Earth. Those who follow the rules live in an earthly paradise, while the rebels live in a very real hell. This prediction-appropriate manichaeism proved disastrous lying with reality. Reality does not work that way. Its complexity is made up of scales of nuances. The markers placed by the imagination belong to her only if she agrees to behave in this way.

That is an old observation. Science has not come into play as a result of religion. It has always existed among imaginative people whose minds are consistent. For them, the rapprochement of imagination and reality is based on experience. The present must sediment according to the prediction, otherwise it must be changed. The future is not a substitute for the present. Paradise is not a substitute for real life.

The matter mocked the divine hopes, it was the first to escape the dictates of religion. Science accurately describes its destiny. The temporal dimension of matter is so homogeneous that its future is as concrete as its present. A different kind of confinement. In religion the future is the prisoner of the present. In science it is the present that takes the future prisoner. In this sense there is a very strong resemblance between (a certain practice of) religion and (a certain practice of) science: when the relationship between prediction and realization is frozen. This is also called academism.

For the thinking subject, escaping religion is more difficult. Today science still does not explain consciousness correctly. The mind-body gap remains deep. Thus the so heavy principles of religion could have survived about our personal destiny. And make a drink on the fate of matter.

Is it not surprising that creationism and other naïve intrusions of religion into reality are so successful in the 21st century? Century, however, modelled, in most aspects, by a conquering science. I see it as a demonstration that the radicalism of religion survives through that of science. For there is an authentic scientific denialism: that of pretending to explain despite the fact that the imagination behind the explanation is too weak. This is the case with consciousness, when it is reduced to neural correlations. Neuroscientific attempts too weak, basically because we do not know how to explain neurons as sets of their atoms. How can we imagine then the phenomenon they will produce together… before observing it.

Religion and science harbor their denials about our ignorances. It is these denials that make them mutually exclusive. Religious denialism hinders the present by imposing its myths on it. Scientific denialism hinders the future by imposing its repetition of the present. Nothing like if we use religious and scientific positivisms, that we can rename mysticism and realism.

Mysticism is the creation of possibilities. It extends the temporal dimension of our representations without freezing them. Realism is the fixation of the mystical 'drawing' by the experiences of the present. The mind is thus a paste whose oldest heart freezes slowly while the surface oscillates between all states. Realism in the center, mystical patterns for the mantle.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *