02.05.09
Harris at edge.org discussion
Sam Harris at the Edge discussion of Coyne
It is hard to know where Harris is coming from in this response, but his reference to Aleister Crowley, sarcastic or not, raises an issue that haunts the age of scientism. First, I don’t recommend reading Aleister Crowley. If you are reduced to that option, then you do indeed live in an age of scientism. Quite apart from that almost everything he said was a lie. But the point is that an age of scientism has created a bubble culture where the public, including the scientific public, is systematically conditioned to a limited perspective on the complexities of culture, history, and religion.
The realm of the occult is eliminated from public consciousness, by and large, or else doled out in silly and easily refuted versions of the same.
And yet the reality of the matter falsifies scientific skeptics at once, and in any case shows us how most attempts to extend the reach of science fail to grasp the reality they are dealing with. It is overconfidence in the successes of physics, and overconfidence indeed in the fake success of Darwinism, the latter being the claimed source of grounds for such a restricted reductionism view of everything.
If I have one quibble with Dyson, it is that he has been far too modest in drawing out the implications of his argument. He is, of course, right to declare that “science and religion are here to stay.” But magic is here to stay too, George; Africa is full of it. Is there a conflict between scientific rationality and a belief in magic spells? Specifically, is there a conflict between believing that epilepsy is a result of abnormal neural activity and believing that it is a sign of demonic possession? Dogmatists like Coyne and Dennett clearly think so. They don’t realize, as Dyson must, that the more one understands neurology, the more one will understand—and honor—demonology. Have Coyne and Dennett read the work of sophisticated magicians like Aleister Crowley or Eliphas Levi? Don’t count on it. Ask yourself, how could matter conflict with spirit in any way? Answer: it cannot. Forgive me, but I find it embarrassing to have to explain these things to people who are supposed be well educated.
The Gurdjieff Con » Sam Harris at edge.org, and Aleister Crowley said,
February 5, 2009 at 4:36 pm
[...] Sam Harris at Edge.org (unwittingly) makes a statement about our discussion here. If I have one quibble with Dyson, it is that he has been far too modest in drawing out the implications of his argument. He is, of course, right to declare that “science and religion are here to stay.” But magic is here to stay too, George; Africa is full of it. Is there a conflict between scientific rationality and a belief in magic spells? Specifically, is there a conflict between believing that epilepsy is a result of abnormal neural activity and believing that it is a sign of demonic possession? Dogmatists like Coyne and Dennett clearly think so. They don’t realize, as Dyson must, that the more one understands neurology, the more one will understand—and honor—demonology. Have Coyne and Dennett read the work of sophisticated magicians like Aleister Crowley or Eliphas Levi? Don’t count on it. Ask yourself, how could matter conflict with spirit in any way? Answer: it cannot. Forgive me, but I find it embarrassing to have to explain these things to people who are supposed be well educated. [...]