How and to what does Dr. Tyson blend Science and Art, reason and imagination, and does his argument seem to be a call for Science over religion, or Science as a creative act?Anyone watched or heard...
How and to what does Dr. Tyson blend Science and Art, reason and imagination, and does his argument seem to be a call for Science over religion, or Science as a creative act?
Anyone watched or heard Neil deGrasse Tyson's "Beyond Belief: Thoughts on Cosmic Perspective."
If yes, I need help in answering some questions below. Thank you!!
Here's a link to the video, if you want to watch: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RjW5-4IiSc
Thanks again, I'll take what I can get!
Tyson’s discussion shows the similarities of scientific inquiry into the universe, through astrophysics, and religion. The going to a mountaintop away from civilization for space study has its equivalent in prophets going into the desert or on a mountain, etc., for “enlightenment”; the at-one-ness of the astrophysicist to the universe is like a religious experience, etc.
Tyson seems to be showing that the human quest called religion—seeking to understand God and His will—was the same as the scientist’s need to fit our humanity into the workings of the cosmos. Religion as an abstraction is a mental activity of the self-concious mind, seeking the cosmic consciousness; it is "organized" religion in any of its prescriptive, self-preserving states (Catholicism, Mohammedanism, etc., etc.) that constricts this thinking into dogma. Tyson is criticizing the reductionism of those beliefs into controlled power egos, often finding their “authority” in some human text, claiming it gives that religion the only key to “salvation.”
Science, for Tyson, is another way of “knowing,” one based on logical inquiry. But his main point is the similarity between science and religious inquiry—both excite the human spirit and seek to put our facticity into the cosmos, the “stardust.”