J o u r n a l of Religion a n d Health, Vol. 24, No. 4, W i n t e r 1985
Editorial
The Importance of Ignorance Dr. Lewis Thomas, Chancellor of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, and one of the most lucid writers on science and its implications for human health and well-being, has suggested that we should have a new approach to teaching science. We should start out, Thomas thinks, b y pointing out the vast areas of ignorance and m y s t e r y that contemporary science is uncovering. We should describe the strangeness of the world opened up b y quantum theory. We should make people aware of the imponderable puzzles of the cosmos, the mysteries beyond our present comprehension. In biology, teach the m y s t e r y behind the D N A and the strange shaping of our destinies b y living creatures within our cells, which have been there for millions upon millions of years working out some program about which we know almost nothing. Teach ecology in the large, so that people begin to realize that we are all parts of a vast and complex living system whose delicate energies and balances create and sustain all life. We are part of what appears to be a huge organism in which all the individual forms are interdependent and related. Let each seeker after knowledge know, as the search for truth starts, that the area of the unknown is immense and must be approached with a proper humility. Since all reality is interrelated, each scientist, whatever the field of study, must be prepared to examine thoughtfully what is going on in other fields. The divisions among scientists and humanists must also be reconciled to the extent that each should be able to approach the disciplines of the others with respect and an open mind. Following Dr. Thomas's advice in a somewhat spontaneous way, we recently undertook to repair in some small measure the v a s t areas of ignorance in our personal world view. Somehow we managed to get through school, college, and graduate school at supposedly reputable centers of higher education without being once exposed to anything b u t the very barest introduction to physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics, not to mention such contemporary disciplines as microbiology, genetics, nuclear physics, radiology, electronics, quantum theory. Reading some of the books in which scientists are now attempting to describe these areas of knowledge and speculation in terms a lay person can understand is like taking a journey into an utterly new and unexplored country. One is at first unnerved b y the strangeness of the landscape and the all-but-unintelligible language of the people who are trying to tell us about it. One has to sit down like a little child with an e m p t y and teachable mind in order to make any sense of it at all. Even then, one of the first lessons to learn is that in the world of subatomic particles nothing behaves the w a y we would logically expect it to. A t o m s are not, as we once thought, tiny grains of solid matter but complex combinations of interrelated activity, whole s y s t e m s of particles of energy and mass in constant transformation and, thus, changing relationships to one another. 267
9 1985 Institutes of Religion and Health
268
Journal of Religion and Health
There are mysteries in these processes as profound and complex as any ever perceived or proposed by theologians. There are logical paradoxes and dilemmas which mock what we have previously called realism. They are not solved or removed by our familiar practical tests. When Boswell asked Dr. Johnson during the eighteenth century what he thought of Bishop Berkeley's radical idealism--a kind of neo-Platonism which held t h a t only the idea, the form of a thing was real, the material world being thus a mere imperfect app r o x i m a t i o n - D r . Johnson, who was walking in the country with his biographer, replied by kicking a big rock along the path and saying, " I refute it thus." So much for our logical, material, empirical world where things may be so decided. The realities with which science is dealing today are quite invisible and unreal to the so-called Age of Reason. They are invisible and all but incredible to so-called reasonable people. But the fact is t h a t this universe of motion, relationship, vast distances, incredible speed, infinitesimal smallness, particles that move back and forth between energy and mass is undeniably present. We know these elements exist, because we have in a preliminary way learned to use their power, so far mainly for destructive purposes. Our more patient and profound scientific explorers are beginning to describe a universe utterly different from the one we thought we understood and knew something about. If it were possible to sum up the differences t h a t contemporary studies in nuclear physics and cosmology are making in our perception of the universe, one could use a statement made by James Jeans m o r e than 50 years ago: " T o d a y there is a wide measure of a g r e e m e n t . . , that the stream of knowledge is heading towards a non-mechanical reality; the universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine." Scientific developments in the last half-century, if we can generalize at all, seem to corroborate t h a t prophetic statement. It reminds us of a question t h a t the dean of our theological seminary, Willard L. Sperry, put to his students at about the same time as Jeans's comment. " I f the world were to be destroyed in some cosmic cataclysm, would all thought cease?" He did not answer the question, just asked us to think about it. If one had to answer it today, one might say no. Not because some particular god would continue to think about the next episode in his creation, but because in the cosmic perspective of today the elimination of a particular world, a tiny atomic particle, so to speak, in an infinitely vast cosmos, would be relatively insignificant. As the twentieth century winds down, we may be approaching a new kind of Copernican revolution in which, in the perspective of the infinitely large and the infinitely small, the fate of the earth is a minor incident, a small explosion at most, which does not seriously disturb the cosmic thought process. A t t e m p t i n g as a beginner to grasp some of the concepts and implications of the new physics is an exercise that induces humility. In the same way, the theological establishment of the sixteenth century found the idea that the earth, and therefore the human race, might not be the center of the cosmos an insult to human dignity and divine omnipotence. But humility is a rare virtue and much needed among the learned, whether in theology or in the sciences.
Harry C. Meserve
269
Both areas of the human quest for knowledge have been, and in m a n y ways still are, afflicted with terrible arrogance and a corresponding inability to accept ideas of openness, uncertainty, and hence possibility and change as essential parts of the search for truth. In the long run, nobody can learn anything, and hence, nobody can grow beyond the present level of understanding, unless limits to knowledge can be recognized and the presence of m y s t e r y can be discerned and even welcomed. It was Albert Einstein, the greatest scientist of our century, who said in a statement of his basic beliefs: "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science." Thus it seems t h a t the acceptance of the limitations of knowledge, a confession of ignorance and of mystery, are preconditions of learning more about the nature of reality. The same, we think, must be true for learning more about the sciences of human behavior, health and illness, and the subtle and often mysterious processes of healing. One thing we can certainly find within the health sciences as clearly as the physicists find it in their field is the principle of interconnectedness. We m a y isolate specific events or conditions for purposes of close examination and description, but we m u s t never forget that the isolation is illusory. Something is always going on, and any specific situation is connected to a whole host of related situations and events. An aspect of healing to which too few healers, except possibly analysts and psychotherapists, assent is the examination of how and over what period of time and personal history a particualr situation came into being. The practitioner too often treats the symptoms, not the person; and hence the person is left with the feeling t h a t the illness has invaded the interior of his or her being from the outside.The t r u t h may be quite different. The life style and habits of the person may have been pointing toward the situation and the condition for a long time. The way of life that makes for a particular kind of ailment needs to be understood by the patient, so t h a t the adjustments necessary to a healthier way of life may get started. Once, in a time of poor health some years ago, we said to our doctor in some desperation, " H o w long will it be before we begin to feel well again?" He replied, " H o w long did it take you to get to the place where you are now?" The question brought us up short and made us undertake a lot of self-searching, some of it very painful. But it was a turning point, and we still recall that question as one of the most therapeutic t r e a t m e n t s we ever experienced. The loneliness and sense of isolation t h a t so often go with ill health are helped rather than hurt by the realization t h a t health is a condition of dynamic balance, subject to constant revision in the light of new events and even new attitudes. The interconnectedness of all reality reaches into the experience of every individual's personal journey. To a t t e m p t to cut ourselves off from it, as some do, is to lose touch with one of the vital forces t h a t make healing and health possible. We have been impressed, while exploring the distant ranges of our ignorance, to learn t h a t scientists also have had to face the facts and problems of subjectivism in their search for knowledge. We were brought up with the idea t h a t the material world, the world of the stone t h a t Dr. Johnson kicked, was a solid, stubborn reality that could be observed, measured, and predicted with
270
Journal of Religion and Health
some assurance t h a t it would behave like a well-regulated machine. Now we are being told that the observer, the human consciousness t h a t watches and studies the behavior and activity of subatomic particles, plays a vital role in what is being observed and reported. " I t is interesting," writes John Gribbin, " t h a t there are limits to our knowledge as to what an electron is doing when we are looking at it, but it is absolutely mind-blowing to discover t h a t we have no idea at all what it is doing when we are not looking at it." The oberver's consciousness of what is going on in the subatomic world seems to have an effect on what is going on. In a strange way this recognition of the force of the observer as a part of an energy transaction in physics brings us close to the role of the therapist in his interrelations with a client. Is there some kind of transference process that prevails not only in psychothererapy but also in the study of the behavior of the basic processes of all reality? Are there currents of energy in the process of observation and reflection t h a t can actually influence the activities of the world outside our so-called private consciousness? W h y not? We are moving, it seems, toward a concept of reality as a living system, an organism. Organisms have energy, creative power, capacity to adjust, ability to evolve new forms and expression, and can even achieve what we might call transcendence. They can produce new meanings and refinements in response to new challenges and visions of possibility. We are leaving behind the picture of the cosmos as a well-adjusted machine and entering a strange new world where not only science but every human discipline must be recast in a dynamic mold. Human life, like all other life, is lived within this comprehensive living system and is subject to its motions, respondent to its moods, and to some degree controlled by its direction. But so far we do not know what t h a t direction is. Many have claimed to know by special revelation or sanctified tradition. Some may turn out to be right. Many of the great intuitions of the past have in much later time been confirmed by the tests of experience and observation. But the only appropriate attitude for a thoughtful person today seems to be a humble readiness to learn and grow with the unfolding patterns and energies of the universe. It is a mysterious universe, and dogmatism is indecent. Furthermore, dogmatism is not a good pathway to new knowledge. Only those who think they have found all there is to know dare consider it. The new open and indeterminate attitude of what we used to call the "hard sciences" leads us to think t h a t the health sciences should seek to achieve a similar openness and humility. Clearly medicine and medical education should be regarded as a process of helping people adjust sanely and personally to the elements of health t h a t they can control in their own life styles. Food, exercise, rest, work, play, human relations, stress, use of drugs and medicines, are all matters the individual can control in some measure, and all have important influence on the health of the individual. One of the first lessons of preventive medicine is to help people take responsibility for themselves and their own health. Environmental factors, as we are beginning to learn, play a much larger part in the health of individuals than we have previously realized; and society as a whole m u s t therefore intervene in m a n y cases to prevent situations that damage the health of large numbers of persons. Acid rain or the
Harry C. Meserve
271
industrial wastes t h a t create health hazards like Love Canal, or the chemicals t h a t poison water or soil so t h a t they are no longer safe or productive, are all health situations in the living system t h a t m u s t be changed or corrected. Behavior t h a t makes the earth or portions of it unlivable, like nuclear war or a disaster like the one in Bhopal, India, are threats to the entire system and all the life t h a t depends on it and shares in its organic wholeness. Methods of exploiting natural resources t h a t result in the pollution of the oceans or rivers and lakes must be abandoned as counterproductive from the point of view of life itself. We cannot afford for much longer to destroy fertile or potentially productive soils, forests which if well-managed can replenish themselves, and resources of air and water without which no life is possible. We must get our priorities straight. We are all part of the living system, and what damages t h a t hurts us all. These are only a few of the areas t h a t now demand the serious attention of the health sciences. It is impressive to see the wonderful ways in which contemporary technology can contribute to the saving of human life, as in the use of artificial hearts and other bodily organs. Even more impressive will be the results of a sustained a t t e m p t by our best minds in the health fields to come to terms with the need for preventive health measures and the education of people in the art of caring for themselves. For in the end people thenselves, by wise self-care, can do much to create healthy lives for themselves. They will always need guidance and help from doctors, as they will also need direct intervention against specific infections, injuries, and illnesses. But they will survive and recover better as they take more responsibility for themselves. Progress and discovery are adventures into ignorance. We are only beginning to learn not only about the human capacity for destructiveness and ruin, but also about the human capacity for self-development and realization of asyet-unknown powers of mind and spirit. "The thing to do," says Lewis Thomas, "to get us through the short run, the years j u s t ahead, is to celebrate our ignorance . . . . As a species, the thing we are biologically good at is learning new things . . . . " Admittedly, we have a lot to learn. But plainly the mood of the new physics, the new chemistry, the new biology, the new cosmology, is open, humble, experimental, and full of wonder, prepared for surprise. It would be good if the mood of the new medicine, the new psychiatry, the new psychology, even the new sociology and the new politics, could follow suit. They are all engaged in the same search for understanding, health, and survival. And, as Dr. Thomas insists, learning is what humans do best.
Harry C. Meserve
Editorial
The Importance of Ignorance Dr. Lewis Thomas, Chancellor of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, and one of the most lucid writers on science and its implications for human health and well-being, has suggested that we should have a new approach to teaching science. We should start out, Thomas thinks, b y pointing out the vast areas of ignorance and m y s t e r y that contemporary science is uncovering. We should describe the strangeness of the world opened up b y quantum theory. We should make people aware of the imponderable puzzles of the cosmos, the mysteries beyond our present comprehension. In biology, teach the m y s t e r y behind the D N A and the strange shaping of our destinies b y living creatures within our cells, which have been there for millions upon millions of years working out some program about which we know almost nothing. Teach ecology in the large, so that people begin to realize that we are all parts of a vast and complex living system whose delicate energies and balances create and sustain all life. We are part of what appears to be a huge organism in which all the individual forms are interdependent and related. Let each seeker after knowledge know, as the search for truth starts, that the area of the unknown is immense and must be approached with a proper humility. Since all reality is interrelated, each scientist, whatever the field of study, must be prepared to examine thoughtfully what is going on in other fields. The divisions among scientists and humanists must also be reconciled to the extent that each should be able to approach the disciplines of the others with respect and an open mind. Following Dr. Thomas's advice in a somewhat spontaneous way, we recently undertook to repair in some small measure the v a s t areas of ignorance in our personal world view. Somehow we managed to get through school, college, and graduate school at supposedly reputable centers of higher education without being once exposed to anything b u t the very barest introduction to physics, chemistry, biology, mathematics, not to mention such contemporary disciplines as microbiology, genetics, nuclear physics, radiology, electronics, quantum theory. Reading some of the books in which scientists are now attempting to describe these areas of knowledge and speculation in terms a lay person can understand is like taking a journey into an utterly new and unexplored country. One is at first unnerved b y the strangeness of the landscape and the all-but-unintelligible language of the people who are trying to tell us about it. One has to sit down like a little child with an e m p t y and teachable mind in order to make any sense of it at all. Even then, one of the first lessons to learn is that in the world of subatomic particles nothing behaves the w a y we would logically expect it to. A t o m s are not, as we once thought, tiny grains of solid matter but complex combinations of interrelated activity, whole s y s t e m s of particles of energy and mass in constant transformation and, thus, changing relationships to one another. 267
9 1985 Institutes of Religion and Health
268
Journal of Religion and Health
There are mysteries in these processes as profound and complex as any ever perceived or proposed by theologians. There are logical paradoxes and dilemmas which mock what we have previously called realism. They are not solved or removed by our familiar practical tests. When Boswell asked Dr. Johnson during the eighteenth century what he thought of Bishop Berkeley's radical idealism--a kind of neo-Platonism which held t h a t only the idea, the form of a thing was real, the material world being thus a mere imperfect app r o x i m a t i o n - D r . Johnson, who was walking in the country with his biographer, replied by kicking a big rock along the path and saying, " I refute it thus." So much for our logical, material, empirical world where things may be so decided. The realities with which science is dealing today are quite invisible and unreal to the so-called Age of Reason. They are invisible and all but incredible to so-called reasonable people. But the fact is t h a t this universe of motion, relationship, vast distances, incredible speed, infinitesimal smallness, particles that move back and forth between energy and mass is undeniably present. We know these elements exist, because we have in a preliminary way learned to use their power, so far mainly for destructive purposes. Our more patient and profound scientific explorers are beginning to describe a universe utterly different from the one we thought we understood and knew something about. If it were possible to sum up the differences t h a t contemporary studies in nuclear physics and cosmology are making in our perception of the universe, one could use a statement made by James Jeans m o r e than 50 years ago: " T o d a y there is a wide measure of a g r e e m e n t . . , that the stream of knowledge is heading towards a non-mechanical reality; the universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine." Scientific developments in the last half-century, if we can generalize at all, seem to corroborate t h a t prophetic statement. It reminds us of a question t h a t the dean of our theological seminary, Willard L. Sperry, put to his students at about the same time as Jeans's comment. " I f the world were to be destroyed in some cosmic cataclysm, would all thought cease?" He did not answer the question, just asked us to think about it. If one had to answer it today, one might say no. Not because some particular god would continue to think about the next episode in his creation, but because in the cosmic perspective of today the elimination of a particular world, a tiny atomic particle, so to speak, in an infinitely vast cosmos, would be relatively insignificant. As the twentieth century winds down, we may be approaching a new kind of Copernican revolution in which, in the perspective of the infinitely large and the infinitely small, the fate of the earth is a minor incident, a small explosion at most, which does not seriously disturb the cosmic thought process. A t t e m p t i n g as a beginner to grasp some of the concepts and implications of the new physics is an exercise that induces humility. In the same way, the theological establishment of the sixteenth century found the idea that the earth, and therefore the human race, might not be the center of the cosmos an insult to human dignity and divine omnipotence. But humility is a rare virtue and much needed among the learned, whether in theology or in the sciences.
Harry C. Meserve
269
Both areas of the human quest for knowledge have been, and in m a n y ways still are, afflicted with terrible arrogance and a corresponding inability to accept ideas of openness, uncertainty, and hence possibility and change as essential parts of the search for truth. In the long run, nobody can learn anything, and hence, nobody can grow beyond the present level of understanding, unless limits to knowledge can be recognized and the presence of m y s t e r y can be discerned and even welcomed. It was Albert Einstein, the greatest scientist of our century, who said in a statement of his basic beliefs: "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science." Thus it seems t h a t the acceptance of the limitations of knowledge, a confession of ignorance and of mystery, are preconditions of learning more about the nature of reality. The same, we think, must be true for learning more about the sciences of human behavior, health and illness, and the subtle and often mysterious processes of healing. One thing we can certainly find within the health sciences as clearly as the physicists find it in their field is the principle of interconnectedness. We m a y isolate specific events or conditions for purposes of close examination and description, but we m u s t never forget that the isolation is illusory. Something is always going on, and any specific situation is connected to a whole host of related situations and events. An aspect of healing to which too few healers, except possibly analysts and psychotherapists, assent is the examination of how and over what period of time and personal history a particualr situation came into being. The practitioner too often treats the symptoms, not the person; and hence the person is left with the feeling t h a t the illness has invaded the interior of his or her being from the outside.The t r u t h may be quite different. The life style and habits of the person may have been pointing toward the situation and the condition for a long time. The way of life that makes for a particular kind of ailment needs to be understood by the patient, so t h a t the adjustments necessary to a healthier way of life may get started. Once, in a time of poor health some years ago, we said to our doctor in some desperation, " H o w long will it be before we begin to feel well again?" He replied, " H o w long did it take you to get to the place where you are now?" The question brought us up short and made us undertake a lot of self-searching, some of it very painful. But it was a turning point, and we still recall that question as one of the most therapeutic t r e a t m e n t s we ever experienced. The loneliness and sense of isolation t h a t so often go with ill health are helped rather than hurt by the realization t h a t health is a condition of dynamic balance, subject to constant revision in the light of new events and even new attitudes. The interconnectedness of all reality reaches into the experience of every individual's personal journey. To a t t e m p t to cut ourselves off from it, as some do, is to lose touch with one of the vital forces t h a t make healing and health possible. We have been impressed, while exploring the distant ranges of our ignorance, to learn t h a t scientists also have had to face the facts and problems of subjectivism in their search for knowledge. We were brought up with the idea t h a t the material world, the world of the stone t h a t Dr. Johnson kicked, was a solid, stubborn reality that could be observed, measured, and predicted with
270
Journal of Religion and Health
some assurance t h a t it would behave like a well-regulated machine. Now we are being told that the observer, the human consciousness t h a t watches and studies the behavior and activity of subatomic particles, plays a vital role in what is being observed and reported. " I t is interesting," writes John Gribbin, " t h a t there are limits to our knowledge as to what an electron is doing when we are looking at it, but it is absolutely mind-blowing to discover t h a t we have no idea at all what it is doing when we are not looking at it." The oberver's consciousness of what is going on in the subatomic world seems to have an effect on what is going on. In a strange way this recognition of the force of the observer as a part of an energy transaction in physics brings us close to the role of the therapist in his interrelations with a client. Is there some kind of transference process that prevails not only in psychothererapy but also in the study of the behavior of the basic processes of all reality? Are there currents of energy in the process of observation and reflection t h a t can actually influence the activities of the world outside our so-called private consciousness? W h y not? We are moving, it seems, toward a concept of reality as a living system, an organism. Organisms have energy, creative power, capacity to adjust, ability to evolve new forms and expression, and can even achieve what we might call transcendence. They can produce new meanings and refinements in response to new challenges and visions of possibility. We are leaving behind the picture of the cosmos as a well-adjusted machine and entering a strange new world where not only science but every human discipline must be recast in a dynamic mold. Human life, like all other life, is lived within this comprehensive living system and is subject to its motions, respondent to its moods, and to some degree controlled by its direction. But so far we do not know what t h a t direction is. Many have claimed to know by special revelation or sanctified tradition. Some may turn out to be right. Many of the great intuitions of the past have in much later time been confirmed by the tests of experience and observation. But the only appropriate attitude for a thoughtful person today seems to be a humble readiness to learn and grow with the unfolding patterns and energies of the universe. It is a mysterious universe, and dogmatism is indecent. Furthermore, dogmatism is not a good pathway to new knowledge. Only those who think they have found all there is to know dare consider it. The new open and indeterminate attitude of what we used to call the "hard sciences" leads us to think t h a t the health sciences should seek to achieve a similar openness and humility. Clearly medicine and medical education should be regarded as a process of helping people adjust sanely and personally to the elements of health t h a t they can control in their own life styles. Food, exercise, rest, work, play, human relations, stress, use of drugs and medicines, are all matters the individual can control in some measure, and all have important influence on the health of the individual. One of the first lessons of preventive medicine is to help people take responsibility for themselves and their own health. Environmental factors, as we are beginning to learn, play a much larger part in the health of individuals than we have previously realized; and society as a whole m u s t therefore intervene in m a n y cases to prevent situations that damage the health of large numbers of persons. Acid rain or the
Harry C. Meserve
271
industrial wastes t h a t create health hazards like Love Canal, or the chemicals t h a t poison water or soil so t h a t they are no longer safe or productive, are all health situations in the living system t h a t m u s t be changed or corrected. Behavior t h a t makes the earth or portions of it unlivable, like nuclear war or a disaster like the one in Bhopal, India, are threats to the entire system and all the life t h a t depends on it and shares in its organic wholeness. Methods of exploiting natural resources t h a t result in the pollution of the oceans or rivers and lakes must be abandoned as counterproductive from the point of view of life itself. We cannot afford for much longer to destroy fertile or potentially productive soils, forests which if well-managed can replenish themselves, and resources of air and water without which no life is possible. We must get our priorities straight. We are all part of the living system, and what damages t h a t hurts us all. These are only a few of the areas t h a t now demand the serious attention of the health sciences. It is impressive to see the wonderful ways in which contemporary technology can contribute to the saving of human life, as in the use of artificial hearts and other bodily organs. Even more impressive will be the results of a sustained a t t e m p t by our best minds in the health fields to come to terms with the need for preventive health measures and the education of people in the art of caring for themselves. For in the end people thenselves, by wise self-care, can do much to create healthy lives for themselves. They will always need guidance and help from doctors, as they will also need direct intervention against specific infections, injuries, and illnesses. But they will survive and recover better as they take more responsibility for themselves. Progress and discovery are adventures into ignorance. We are only beginning to learn not only about the human capacity for destructiveness and ruin, but also about the human capacity for self-development and realization of asyet-unknown powers of mind and spirit. "The thing to do," says Lewis Thomas, "to get us through the short run, the years j u s t ahead, is to celebrate our ignorance . . . . As a species, the thing we are biologically good at is learning new things . . . . " Admittedly, we have a lot to learn. But plainly the mood of the new physics, the new chemistry, the new biology, the new cosmology, is open, humble, experimental, and full of wonder, prepared for surprise. It would be good if the mood of the new medicine, the new psychiatry, the new psychology, even the new sociology and the new politics, could follow suit. They are all engaged in the same search for understanding, health, and survival. And, as Dr. Thomas insists, learning is what humans do best.
Harry C. Meserve
