March 2005

There are three general classifications of knowledge, namely, science, philosophy, and religion. By science we mean the organized knowledge of natural law and its application to life. By philosophy we mean the opinions one holds about the world, life, and reality. Although we generally speak of philosophy in relation to those statements which have been put down in writing by men whose opinions we respect, as a matter of fact, philosophy is anybody’s opinion about anything. By religion we mean any man’s belief about his relationship to the invisible universe. Or, we might say, religion is a man’s idea of God, or gods—of the ultimate reality.

It follows, then, that there are many philosophies and many religions, since in both instances they constitute opinions. But not so with science, for science is a knowledge of the laws of nature. We also speak of pure science and applied science. Pure science is a knowledge of principles, while applied science is the technique for using universal principles.

A scientist, in whatever field of investigation he may be engaged, is one who uses universal principles. Once a principle is discovered and the laws governing it are ascertained, he maintains absolute faith in that principle.

Science is not an investigation into the why, but into the how. The why of anything, that is, the reason for its being, science makes no attempt to answer. If it should shift its field from the knowledge of principles and facts into the field of inquiry as to why these principles exist, then science becomes a philosophy.

Today, many men of science are beginning to speculate on scientific principles. And as they do this their speculations fall into two generalized classifications, philosophically speaking. These speculations usually lead them either to a philosophic basis of materialism or to a philosophic basis of idealism.

Both the idealist and the materialist believe that the universe is a thing of intelligence. The only difference is that the materialist refuses to admit that the intelligence operating through the laws of nature is backed by or permeated with any form of consciousness; that is, the intelligence is merely a blind but intelligent force, a conglomeration of immutable laws of cause and effect with no element of consciousness, no sentiment, no feeling. He sees only blind force, but he sees blind force intelligently organized.

The idealist feels that back of and operating in and through the laws of nature there is volition and consciousness. He maintains that the manifestation of physical life upon this planet always is in accord with organized intelligence. He feels that organized intelligence can be accounted for only on the basis that there is an engineer as well as an engine.

There are, then, these two branches of philosophy—the idealistic and the materialistic. The idealist believes in consciousness, hence a Spiritual Universe, while the materialist does not. Naturally, the scientist who is philosophically a materialist believes in no God, no Spiritual Universe, and no consciousness in the universe which responds to man. He does not believe in the immortality of the individual soul, nor can he give any real meaning to life. He may be a humanitarian and a very good man, but his ultimate philosophy is: “Six feet under and all is over.”

The scientist who feels that there is consciousness in the universe finds no difficulty in believing in God or in the universe as a spiritual system, permeated with a consciousness which responds to man. Therefore he believes in prayer, immortality, the value of faith, and feels there is a definite meaning to life. An increasing number of scientific men are taking this position. The scientist who is a materialist has no religion unless it be one of humanitarianism, while the idealist can scarcely get along without some form of religious conviction.

But if the idealist is a scientific man, believing as he must that everything is governed by law, his religion cannot be superstitious. He cannot believe in a God who specializes on one person more than on another, or who esteems one person above another; nor can he believe that the laws of nature can be broken or modified through anyone’s prayer or faith. Therefore the scientific mind which is at the same time idealistic believes that the universe is not only intelligent, but that it is also consciousness, and will be satisfied with no religious concepts which contradict reason, common sense, and a cosmos of law and order.

When the early discoveries of science refuted ancient superstitions and proved that this world was not the center of the universe, that it was round and not flat, the faith which many people had began to wane. The ancient shibboleths, dogmas, and superstitions could no longer be held valid for intelligent men, and formalized religion began to lose its hold on the inquiring scientific mind. Materialism was in the ascendancy.

However, today we find increasing numbers of scientific men emerging from that age of materialism. This is due to the fact that modern science has not theoretically been able to resolve the material universe into purely mechanical energy, but has discovered that the smallest particles which it supposes to exist exercise a sort of volition, which of course leaves room for freedom. Once you establish freedom and volition as an operating factor in connection with the energy which becomes form, then you have established a universe of consciousness. And once you establish a universe of consciousness you establish the possibility of communion, and arrive at a logical basis for faith, prayer, the religious and the mystical life. •

Excerpted from Living the Science of Mind by Ernest Holmes, published by DeVorss and Company.

Visit Ernest Holmes archives

Back

To read further, pick up your copy of Science of Mind Magazine
or click here to

United Church of Religious Science
Visit SOM Mall