Science

Scientists use logic and reason to challenge ideas about our world.  Occasionally scientific reasoning challenges religious beliefs.  I have found a rule of thumb which I believe can be used to classify problems that appear to be in conflict; that appear to fall into both the scientific and spiritual domains. 

In order for something to become a scientific principle, it must be demonstrable under a specific set of conditions, using a precise procedure, and give the expected results regardless of who demonstrates the principle.  This simple yet rigid rule has allowed science to discover many properties of our world and teach us how to create things that give us fabulous power and control over our lives.

This rule however also insists science limit itself to the study of phenomena which is measurable, ie. "external" to human consciousness, where observation is presented to our consciousness through our five senses.  Yet a substantial portion of human experience is only available "internally", within human consciousness and "behind" the five senses.  It is my belief that spiritual experiences are totally contained within human consciousness, and as a result they cannot be verified using scientific procedures or equipment.  At best, science has only been able to measure our brains on spirituality, and nothing that is fundamentally spiritual in nature.

Modern science was formed by deliberately ignoring differences in human consciousness and perception.  Amidst the alchemy of the middle ages when widely varying claims of physical phenomena were being made and no consistent language existed with which to describe materials, equipment, procedures, or results, the then newly agreed upon field of science provided a far more rigid framework around which phenomena could be tested verified and cataloged.  The results in the past few hundred years have been nothing less than spectacular and no sane mind can now dispute the power of scientific discovery.

But no parallel framework has been commonly acknowledged for the remainder of human experience.  Religions created by man have attempted to map part of this realm, but without a clear definition of what aspects of human experience are spiritual and which are not, religious leaders have often over stepped their bounds and attempted to define phenomena in the physical external world, which is outside of the spiritual scope.

Similarly, the indisputable power of science and its ability to create order out of chaos has lead many to believe that science can provide answers to all phenomena; but no it cannot, science deliberately recuses it self when phenomena cannot be tested or measured.  Perhaps one of the best examples of this is the search for a cure for a number of fatal ailments.  There are many cases where people "spontaneously remiss", where they are cured from diseases even when medical doctors with knowledge of biological science have pronounced the condition fatal.  Medical science may study these remissions in an attempt to learn something new, but unless the conditions that surround the cured patient also produce cures in other patients, medical science is obliged to simply file the results away until more is understood.  It is here that experts in medical science can over step their bounds by saying "there is no cure for this disease".  This statement is grandiose in that it denies even the existence of ideas beyond science.  "Spontaneous remission" is actually doc-speak for "gee, we're clueless".

An additional problem with even "there is no known cure" is that when voices of authority make such statements, it can undermine the patient's faith in their ability to find an alternative or uncommon cure.  "You have weeks to live" can often be a self-fulfilling prophecy.  The collision between the scientifically narrow minded "no known cure", and the spiritually faithful "I have the ability to heal" occurs when we as individuals have no clear boundary between scientific and spiritual systems.

I seek to define this boundary to help us understand the differences between that which is personal and that which is shared.  A tremendous amount of our individual strength remains trapped if we believe the idea that someone else determines our personal truth.

Religion

There is no question that there is tremendous power in groups.  And with the obvious success of science promoting the importance of external experience, a balancing force is needed to promote the importance of internal experience.  This is a natural application for religion, where a group of people can gather together, validate (but never verify) their internal experiences, find strength and respect for themselves and others, and then face their worlds with renewed determination.

But a problem forms in most every religion when devotees, or worse yet the religious leaders, begin to believe that in order to be a follower of the religion, everyone must believe the same things.  If shared beliefs are held to be more important than personal beliefs, respect for the individual is sacrificed.  And if God is a fundamentally personal experience then insisting on shared belief will actually undermine a person's relationship with God.  I have seen leaders and followers of nearly all the world's religions, at one time or another, promote ideas that undermine everyone's relationship with God.

Spirituality

It is for this reason that I promote spirituality and not religion.  By making this distinction it is easier to recognize a religion that is not spiritual, and that spirituality does not require a religion.  It is of course possible to have a spiritual religion but care must be taken to ensure that at each moment individual spiritual connections are alive and well, and that the religion then grows from the strength of the people and not the words that are spoken.

I've noticed that individual spirituality seems to be born in the moment an individual chooses to separate themselves from the ideas of of their roots.  It is at this point that the individual can begin to have experiences that affirm or deny their own personal truth instead of the truth of others.  At this point the individual is free to change some belief that doesn't match their personal experience, and develop faith when a belief is affirmed by personal experience.  As a result this faith is no longer blind, but one based on what they know to be true.  This, I believe, is the basis for a real, rational, and powerful sense of spirituality.

Self-esteem and individuality appear to play pivotal roles in the development of true spirituality.  In fact, developing a clear boundary between external and internal experience appears to allow self-esteem to exist and flourish.  Clearly our uniqueness stems from that which is personal and not what is common about us, but our real understanding of truth does not begin until each one of us takes on the challenge of interpreting our own experiences of our own reality, and that requires awareness of our separateness and the esteem to believe we have purpose independent of and regardless of others. 

And so it seems the grand design of human consciousness amazingly provides a perfect incubator for spiritual development.  Keep in mind that we can all help each other by sharing ideas, but we must do so with respect for other's ideas, because ultimately each of us must do the final work.  It is clear to me now that we must all find our own way to spirit, together.