Hello, good evening! I wanted to talk with you about this book. I just read it. Dan Brown, Origin. It was surprisingly
thought-provoking.
I actually enjoyed reading it. He does write page turners, that is for sure. I was touched by a few passages in there. I was reminded of an encyclical written by John Paul II, that
said that faith and reason are the two wings of the great eagle, that lead the human intelligence up to the sky.
And I was reminded of that, because this book talks, primarily,
about the relationship between science and faith. And, it seems that throughout the entire book,
we're placed with this question: is the advent of all the new inventions and science
going to eliminate the need for religion? And... It's a great question! It's a question
that we're facing in this modern world. He sometimes is kind of dialectical, or oppositionary,
aggressive against formal religion.
And I think he's improperly so. But, nevertheless, I wanted to speak about a little passage,
I'll read a little part of that passage. It's towards the end. By the way - there are spoilers in this video.
You probably should pay attention that. Towards the end, Langdon, the main character,
is asked whether or not science is enough for him. And he responds interestingly. He responds, that it's a question between the difference,
between codes and patterns.
Codes being something that is done by an intelligence,
patterns being something that is just simply natural. And, he says some interesting things. He says that,
it seems to him, that there might be something out there. Let's read this: when she - the person he's speaking with,
Ambra, is going to say: "So do you think DNA is created by an intelligence?" He responds: Langdon held up his hand in mock self-defense, "Easy tiger!"
He said laughingly- "You're treading on dangerous ground.
Let me just say this. Ever since I was a child, I've had the gut sense
that there was a consciousness behind the universe. When I witnessed the precision of mathematics, the reliability
of physics, and the symmetry of the cosmos, I don't feel like I'm observing cold science;
I feel as if I'm seeing a living footprint... The shadow of some greater force
that is just beyond our grasp." Ambra could feel the power in his words.
"I wish everyone thought like you do," she finally said.
"It seems we do a lot of fighting over God.
Everyone has different - a different version of the truth." And that is kind of at the heart of this book. It often isn't so nice, in the sense of discovering God,
but he brings home a point there. I don't think that the nexus between discovering God
and science is simply just found in the Bible.
I think he brings home a point. I think science
is more directly related to philosophy. So, through science, it's true, we could say such things as he says in this book. We discover the footprints of God.
And, in a further video, I will mention some of the
signs of God that I believe that we find in this creation. The signs he's referring to, here, in this book;
for example, the order of all creation. But there are further signs, I would argue. Some of the problems I find with the book, is that he seems
to put an opposition between religion and advancement.
Advancement of Science,
advancement in technology. And, I think that he's misguided. Although he does seem to allude to the fact
that there does exist those in religions that are open to it. But, I've been studying all my life within Christianity and other religions,
and I've always been profoundly touched by that first quote that I brought up.
It seems, that true religion, true spirituality,
always works with both wings. That is, the wing of faith - you can also speak about that intuitive
dimension of the mind, that literary dimension of the mind. But, definitely, that aspect of faith on the one side,
and the aspect of reason, science, mathematics on the other, I think that the harmony between
those two things, is absolutely capital. We have to delve into that; there is no opposition
between the two sides of the human person.
That intuitive dimension and that scientific. He opposes evolution and faith.
And it's true that some Christians would, But, it's interesting to note, that the Popes
never opposed them. Catholicism has never seen an
opposition between evolution and faith.
We leave that to the domain of science.
In fact, evolution is a beautiful thought, if you accept that evolution is possible,
it definitely integrates itself into our faith. And there are many ways;
we could talk about that on a later date. It's not even that revolutionary. I'm not talking
like Teilhard de Chardin or something like that.
But, nevertheless, there is no
opposition between physics and faith. I would refer you to father Spitzer,
or there're many other sources. And over history, too, there has been no real opposition.
I believe that a lot of it has been propaganda.
He also poses the question of Technology.
Is technology leading us away from religion and formal religion? It's true that, we're much more aware of the difference of opinion
between one culture and another, between one religion and another. But, I firmly believe that, through time,
the truth will impose itself. We will discover the truth.
And, that there really is nothing to be afraid of
by the advancement of Technology. It will - if it's good - it will only help man. What is bad in Technology, will only hurt man, and we will discover it.
And man - the goodness of man - will be victorious.
I was also thinking, though, that it's important to realize that Dan Brown,
he seems to be asserting in this book a new kind of religion. It's not so clear though. It's a novel,
so it's much more subtle than that. He wants to assert a new kind of religion, and death to the
old religions, such as Catholicism - which is named per se.
And, a birth to a religion believing in science, because science
can tell us where we came from, and where we're going. I don't think it really does in reality.
It doesn't really tell us where we came from. Even if physics is able to speak about spontaneous
creation, through a new understanding of entropy, I still - as he mentions in the book - don't think
that responds to why these laws exist at all. For us, it would really just be another angle,
it would be, how God created the world.
Through physics. And, the process of science, would be
the process of discovering how God created the world. But, he reminds me a lot of 19th century philosopher -
early 1800s philosopher - named Augustus Comte. Augustus Comte, he developed
a religion that we call Positivism.
Which said, that we need to create a new religion,
that says that the truth only comes through science. And they had a cult practice, a liturgy, everything. And, it was through that religion, that they started to rewrite
the history of the opposition between faith and science. So, many of the problems that we know of, that are so famous,
like the Galileo case, were actually rewritten in the 1800s.
It is not true, that there was such a great opposition,
between Galileo and the Church. It would be interesting to refer you to a couple of
different sources for that of well-known historians, who have disproven any historic
opposition between faith and science. But, it comes from this religion called positivism,
which says that -well... Religion, is also a philosophy- that says that we need to get rid of the old religion,
and enter into the new.
Which is that of science. Which is absurd in itself. The question of the truth of this religion,
or that religion, will be discovered through time. I personally know, that if you don't have an encounter
with the person of Jesus Christ, it's difficult to believe.
And if you have been touched by the person of Jesus Christ,
we root our faith in that - in the encounter with Jesus. And, the fact that God has loved the world so much,
that He's given His only begotten Son. Now, the big thing I take from this is: as Christians and
Catholics, we are not called to be afraid of the truth. We are not.
We should not be afraid of some
new discovery that mankind is going to find. If it discovers something new, it's just gonna tell us a new aspect
about what God has done, and how God has loved us. It's just gonna tell us something new, that we haven't
discovered about the beauty of God and his work. Never be afraid of the truth.
Only be afraid
of your "a priori" - your biases. Only be afraid of not opening up to the truth. Because, if you
close your mind to the truth, you close your mind to beauty. And you won't be I'll discover the beauty in all thing.
And, leaving you with that, would I
recommend to read this book by Dan Brown? I don't know. It's okay. I enjoyed it.
But, I'm not so easily shaken up.
If you're easily shaken up by things, maybe not.
I don't think it would be necessarily that good. It is a page-turner, but I've always been
hesitant with Dan Brown, when reading him. I remember the first time I read The DaVinci Code. You go into the book feeling so intelligent,
because he gives you all these "facts".
But, in reality, those facts are all misconstrued. And, so you feel like you're more intelligent,
but you end up dumb - you know. Because you so easily believe every word that he's
saying, because of the style of his writing. So, if you're able to parse between truth and non-truth in it,
and see what is the opinion of the author, then of course you can read it.
But, if you're not capable of doing that, it's just another book out there,
that's going to confuse and mess with your mind. I hope that you have fun searching,
and that you're never afraid of the truth. And if you're going to search for the truth in this book,
remember that it is fiction. And many have the facts in here - even if
they are said to be facts - aren't facts.
Even if he cites a place, what went on at that place,
may not be true. Keep your head on straight. God bless you!
Good searching! Thank you..
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar