General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums“Why Is God Telling Me to Stop Asking Questions?”
Meet the Woman Behind Neil deGrasse Tysons Cosmos
Ann Druyan, "Cosmos" creator and widow of Carl Sagan, on science vs. religion--and men getting credit for her work.
As the host of the recently concluded series Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey now availableon home video, if you missed it Neil deGrasse Tyson became, along with Americas most prominent astrophysicist, the public face of science in its effort to recapture the public imagination. But although Tyson is an important author in his own right, he didnt conceive, write or produce Cosmos. He essentially served the role of an actor or a news anchor, a charismatic and credible figure reading someone elses words off a Teleprompter. Those words, and damn near everything else about the show, were the work of Ann Druyan, the writer and executive producer who also co-created the original Cosmos series with her late husband, Carl Sagan,more than 30 years ago.
Druyan does not personally seek the limelight and is not a celebrity, but in her own way shes a key cultural figure in the struggle against the popular antagonism to science and the spread of anti-scientific claptrap about climate change and evolution. Those on the creationist or anti-evolutionist fringe who understood the unstinting scientific arguments of Cosmos as a direct attack on their beliefs were entirely correct, but Druyans critique of religion goes well beyond the literal-minded idiocy of the Answers in Genesis crowd. She describes herself as an agnostic rather than an atheist based on the premise that science must withhold judgment on questions it cannot answer but she has also described religious faith as antithetical to the values of science and religion in general as a statement of contempt for nature and reality.
Druyan is well aware that many religious people would reject those characterizations, and those snippets may make her philosophical approach sound less generous and open-minded than it really is. While she is profoundly uncomfortable with the artificial wall between the domains of science and religion erected by Stephen Jay Goulds famous pronouncement that they are non-overlapping magisteria, she welcomes discussion of seemingly indefinable and unscientific concepts like sacredness and spirituality. Those things are to be found at a capacious and more evolved level, she argues, by leaving behind our infantile sense of centrality in the universe, in which we are the precious offspring of a benevolent protector, and instead shifting our focus to the profound and immense mysteries presented by 13 billion years of cosmic evolution and four and a half billion years of the story of life on this planet.
During my all-too-brief phone conversation with Druyan, we also discussed her brilliant rereading of the story of the Garden of Eden, which she sees as the story of humanitys escape from a maximum-security prison with 24-hour surveillance. Adam and Eves capital offense is that they seek knowledge and ask questions, precisely the qualities that define the human species. At least in that story, God appears to demand a subservient and doctrinaire incuriosity, and many of his followers continue to insist on that path to this day. There are certainly currents within the major religious traditions that resist such a simple-minded negation of science Buddhism, Judaism and the Catholic Church are now OK, generally speaking, with both evolution and cosmology but Druyans provocative critique of religion as a distorting social force is well worth considering even if you think her argument is too sweeping.
http://www.alternet.org/culture/why-god-telling-me-stop-asking-questions-meet-woman-behind-neil-degrasse-tysons-cosmos
merrily
(45,251 posts)where people acknowledge that their pastor's, rabbi's, imam's, etc. particular interpretation of the Bible or the Koran doesn't have to become secular law, I'm good.
That is hard enough. Still, I think that is a much easier row to hoe than trying to get everyone to give up or alter their religious beliefs.
Supposedly, the surviving Boston Marathon bomber wrote something about the US fighting people who look into the barrel of US guns and see Paradise and "how can you compete with that?" Whether you believe Dzohar wrote that or not, its a damned good question (pun intended).
A good number of people desperately want to believe in a God that provides them and their loved ones an eternally happy afterlife while sending the people who hurt them in this life to hell forever, unless they repent before dying. "And, how do you compete with that?"
Lawyers can help us get the legal decisions (if our judges themselves aren't deciding cases based on religion and partisan politics). But, you'd have to torture and brainwash to change the beliefs to which people cling for dear life--and even then...
I'd rather volunteer with, or donate to, a group that is waging the legal battles.