Just because you use science words doesn’t mean you’re being scientific

Religion / Science

A friend of mine (actually the editor of the book I’m working on) sent me this link:

It’s apparently approaching viral status now.

It’s awful. It’s a pastiche. It’s everything that drives me nuts about the way people try to misappropriate scientific thought and apply it to religious experience.

The particular problem here is that these people seem to be trying to draw conclusions from quantum mechanical mathematical ideas and extending them much further than they really ought to be doing. Especially without labeling what they do as speculation.

Which is an odd thing for a person who writes a blog called “Entangled States” to be criticizing someone else for doing but…

I’ve always tried to find ways that scientific insights can inform religious thinking. I’ve always been strongly resistant to any attempt to take an incomplete understanding of a phenomenon and build a religious world view or theological system upon it.

Bishop Butler tried that in his “Analogies”. Didn’t work then. No reason to think that our era is fundamentally different. At least not when we subtract out the messianic complexes of many modern day “consciousness” thinkers.

I mean – geesh. You’d think the poster of the video would at least take the time to make sure they spelled QuantUm physics properly.

The Author

Episcopal bishop, dad, astronomer, erstwhile dancer...


  1. David Bailey says

    I made it one minute and 32 seconds into the video. Perhaps my mind is the zize of an apricot . . .

  2. Someone sent me this on Facebook – makes yours look sane by comparison. Sadly I don’t think it’s a spoof. The advert for the CD is worth waiting for.

Comments are closed.