"...the thermonuclear reactor and associated machines were introduced, and spread widely, while mysticism out of Asia was denying, in millions of minds, that science could answer the questions that mattered." (p. 144)
Slow down, there, Anderson. Can science alone answer all the questions that matter? There are different questions so there are different answers. A guy I knew read one book that told him that: "The East does not have the answer!" (The answer to what?) Science certainly answers many questions that do matter, far more than would have been thought possible, about the origins of the universe and life and processes in the brain. But can it answer moral or aesthetic questions? Can it tell us how to live, how to reflect on life, how to act towards each other or how to organize society? Human beings practice science but first they are human beings. Asiatic mysticism offers some answers to some of these questions.
See also:
2 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
If Anderson could reply to your comments, I think he would agree with much of what you said. I think that here he was speaking from impatience and frustration with our latter day science hating neo-Luddites.
I think of science as that branch of thought trying to find out HOW and WHAT makes things work. Theology and philosophy goes into the WHY of things.
Ad astra! Sean
Kale, Paul!
At least in that passage, Anderson does not assert that science can or cannot answer the questions that matter; he describes a historical phenomenon (from an imagined history). I remember — just to take one example — the Japanese lady in THE BOAT OF A MILLION YEARS wondering and asking whether new ideas and enlightenments might be possible; as I recall, the computer network to which she poses her question does not dismiss it as meaningless.
Best Regards,
Nicholas
Post a Comment