The scientist that has become an evangelist

Reading: Memoirs of a Geisha by Arthur Golden and The girl who played with fire by Stieg Larsson.

 Music: I'm listening to... I think Demon kitty rag by Katzenjammer. If you haven't heard this band, I recommend you go on and listen to it.. go on... I'll wait...

So, I just finished reading Breathlessby Dean Koontz and found a very interesting quotation that I’d like to share with the internet. But first a quick synopsis of the book, it tells the story of a retires sniper that has become a carpenter. He has moved to the mountains and there he finds the most beautiful and enigmatic creatures that he has ever seen. In reality, these creatures are not known to humanity, but whoever sees them becomes entranced and feels happy and peaceful. It is a nice book. Won't tell you anything else, again... go on a read it for yourself.

The quotation that inspired me to think it unique is this one:

          “When a scientist tells you that 'the science is settled' in regard to any subject,” Lamar said, “he's ceased to be a scientist, and he's become an evangelist for one cult or another. The entire history of science is that nothing in science is ever settled. New discoveries are continuously made, and they upend old certainties.”

I just love how that sounds. What does it mean though? Well, I think it means that if science stops evolving it becomes a cult. If this is so, I love it even more. I've talked to a lot of scientists or people that swear by science. And it has struck me as funny how committed they are to the “truth”

Now regardless of what it is that “Truth” means, scientists that don't allow themselves to consider all or new avenues of explanations are nothing more than evangelists. Which is what make this quotation so fascinating. Someone like Richard Dawkins for example, he is so committed to the “cause of science” that he sometimes sounds like he is preaching the gospel. The good news are not that Jesus has come, but that the Higgs boson is going to tell us about the secrets of the universe. Or in Dawkins case (he is a an evolutionary biologist) a gene-centered view of evolution.

Now I don't mean to say that I believe in any form of organized religion. On the contrary, I hate it all. I haven't had any religion for a very long time. The reason I bring this things up is because it seems that the human animal will always cling to an idea and tend to become fanatical about it.

Once fanaticism has taken root, what ever standard he or she holds becomes sort of like scripture. Something to be believed rather than evaluated. It is a criticism about scientists accepting instead of thinking. Nice discovery for Koontz.

The rest of the book falls apart for me. Even if I liked the ending of it, the book seemed rushed. Maybe it is too short. At least it wasn't like other Koontz book that leave you wanting. Don't know if anybody has thought the same. There is very bad science on the end of this book. Maybe I'll make another entry entitled “Math against evolution?” later. I haven't found any evidence that would explain what he is saying, so I'll wait until I have more material.

In the mid time... think about this quotation.