On the Limitations of Science & Religion

The tragic shooting of United States service personnel by one of their comrades - a Muslim Psychiatrist - has prompted me to reflect on the shortcomings of the scientifically-trained mind when combined with religious belief, or worse still, extreme ideology - please also see my post on the case of Radovan Karadzic and Dagan Dabic @ http://the-edge-of-town.blogspot.com/

Whilst these are extreme examples of the scientific mind, to all intents and purposes, gone mad, or just plain bad, there are, I feel, underlying issues which are relevant to the more everyday relationship between science, religion and society in this country and elsewhere.

Let's start with the explicit/implicit social status stakes which have become so important in countries such as Britain and the United States. In my experience, scientifically trained individuals tend to assume they are socially superior to other members of society, even if they do not follow a scientific profession. Many have, for instance, found work in better-paid positions within the financial services sector, and look where that has led us ! To systemic insanity and the edge of economic chaos, simple people like me might respond. However, the wider public must also share some responsibility for embracing such obvious charlatanism in the first place. In short, we have given our power away to those who professed to know better, but in actual fact didn't.

Turning again to the case of Johnson vs Nutt on the subject of drugs classification (referred to in my previous post), this has clearly ruffled the feathers of the scientific community with heavyweights such as Labour Peer Professor Lord Robert Winston coming to the defence of so-called scientific integrity.

Now Professor Winston is, in my view, far more of a danger to society than Professor Nutt. The fact is that science of the kind practiced by Winston is deeply value laden. In short, the right to have children supersedes just about every other kind of right and people who don't embrace this notion are socially and morally deficient. This has led to a generation of women - of which I am one, but not one who shares Professor Winston's sentiments - who are obsessed with the need to bear their own children and willing to go to any lengths to this end. Winston and his kind, I would suggest, have created a fertility neurosis amongst women in many Western countries, at a time when there are already many unwanted and uncared for children, and population growth poses one of the greatest threats to the sustainability of both nation states and the wider world.

It is noteworthy that Professor Winston is Jewish, and that unsustainable population growth in both the state of Israel, and, indeed, in neighbouring Palestinian Gaza, is one of the prime causes of instability in that region, although this is one of those truths that dare it's speak their name. For Jews and Muslims population growth is a weapon of mass destruction , which they would do well to focus on as much - if not more so - than other causes of insecurity.

This brings me on to the subjects of Roman Catholicism and Christian fundamentalism, which, like aspects of Islam and Judaism, pose threats to global security. These are also reasons why former British Prime Minster Tony Blair - a Catholic Convert with, I strongly suspect, leanings toward the Christian Right - should be, as far as possible, excluded from international politics, even if people in the business community want to pay alot of money to hear him speak.

Blair is undoubtedly a technocrat, which is precisely why many in the scientific community felt professionally, not to say socially, bolstered by his term in office, with people like Lord Winston accorded celebrity status. This may be one reason why the Professor's website has a colour-scheme which could have been designed by Katie Price. Maybe one of his medical colleagues was the designer of her so-called cosmetic enhancements, and perhaps they'll ghost author "Katie's Guide to Plastic Surgery" one day and make even more money.

The entry of Alan - Corporal or Captain according to your class politics - Johnson into this hitherto cosy relationship, occasional tiffle notwithstanding, between the political and scientific establishments seems to have come as quite a shock, or should that be reality check. Actually, I happen to quite like Alan Johnson, who bears a passing resemblance to David Bowie but is more down-to-earth than fell-to-earth, as he plainly doesn't do drugs. Johnson also seems to have wanted to tighten up on psychiatric drugs during his tenure as Secretary of State for Health, in favour of so-called "talking cures". Whilst I have some doubts about the likes of Cognitive Behaviour and other "State" Therapy - a bit too Soviet for my tastes - there's alot to be said for "Jaw, Jaw", particularly when the alternative is "War, War".