Two views of one reality

By Mukul Sharma

In a 1997 essay Non-Overlapping Magisteria, evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould put forward what he described as “a blessedly simple and entirely conventional resolution to...the supposed conflict between science and religion”.

He also defined the term magisterium as a domain where one form of teaching held the appropriate tools for meaningful discourse and resolution.

He then described the principle as “the magisterium of science covers the empirical realm such as what the universe is made of (fact) and why does it work in this way (theory). The magisterium of religion extends over questions of ultimate meaning and moral value. These two magisteria do not overlap.” But B Alan Wallace, who is now an ex-Buddhist monk after 14 years of being an adept, doesn’t agree. He has an interesting take on it.

All the great pioneers of the scientific revolution, from the 15th to the 19th century, like Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler, Newton and Mendel, for example, were practising Christians, he says.

So, their whole approach to science was deeply influenced by their faith even though they made many truth claims about the natural world. On the other hand, now that science is beginning to delve into the question of mind, consciousness and freewill, it’s invading the turf that used to belong to religion and philosophy.

This raises a subtler point: if religion talks of reality in one way and science in another, then we have to assume they are talking about two different things, or there wouldn’t be a clash of opinion. But, surely, there can’t be two separate realities out there.