Guest Editorial: by Lawrence
Krauss (Foundation Professor of the School of Earth and Space
Exploration and Inaugural Director of the Origins Project at Arizona
State University)
Lawrence Krauss: Science, Religion, and Culture in light of Paris and Charlie Hebdo
I am terribly discouraged, not
just by the senseless violence in Paris, but by the response worldwide
to both the publication of content by Charlie Hebdo before the killings
and by the mass protests throughout the Islamic world to the bittersweet
cover published the week following that tragedy.
As a scientist who has spoken out
and written about the incompatibility between the world’s major
organized religions and the empirical evidence about the universe that
science has provided over the past four centuries, I receive many emails
from the faithful, from a variety of religious backgrounds. While
fanatical fundamentalists have responses that are relatively similar,
what is striking to me is the number of letters I get from well-meaning
followers of Islam who somehow are convinced that the actual words of
the Qur’an actually scientifically anticipated the description of the
world that science has produced in the fifteen centuries or so since the
book was written. This derives from the notion, which also has been
conveyed to me by many, that the book is ‘perfect’, every word the
direct speech of God, and therefore it not only could not have been
written by an ordinary mortal, but it can also not be in error in any
way.
Perhaps because the
Judeo-Christian scriptures are so much older, there has been much more
time for theologians in these sects to sensibly acknowledge the facts
that the words contained therein must be interpreted as products of the
humans who wrote them, and of the time in which they were written. While
some zealots still maintain the ludicrous notion that the Earth is 6000
years old, this is not the official doctrine of the leaders of these
religions. While they nevertheless maintain the sacred nature of the
inspiration for the bible, very few assert the Bible itself is so sacred
that it cannot even be discussed intelligently and skeptically by
people who would like to better understand that document and their own
place in the cosmos.
However, this does not seem to be
the case in the Islamic world, and this is what makes the current
dilemma so urgent, and what implies that Charlie Hebdo, and other
publications that ridicule politicians, sex, and religion with equal
force are so important.
Hate speech involves people, not
ideas. No idea should be sacred in the modern world. Instead, in order
for us to progress as a species, every claim, every idea should be
subject to debate, intelligent discussion, and when necessary ridicule.
Satire is perhaps one of the most important gifts we have to inspire us
to re-examine our own lives and our own ideologies. If every other area
of human endeavor is open to ridicule, then certainly so should
religion. The notion that a cartoon, which presents an image of a
historical figure, is so blasphemous to provoke violence is repugnant to
anyone who believes that free and intelligent discourse is the basis of
a civilized world.
This means that we need to
encourage even ridicule of the sacred Qur’an in the public media. The
more frequently and openly this appears, the less threatening it will
seem, and the more acceptable it will be for believers to actually
intellectually engage rather than emotionally and violently act.
The biggest threat to the peaceful and sustainable progress of human civilization in the 21st
century, with challenges ranging from global climate change, to energy
and water shortages, and the oppression of women throughout the world,
is a refusal to accept the empirical evidence of reality as a basis for
action. Those who feel they know the truth in advance, and therefore
cannot even listen to alternative arguments, are not just part of the
problem, they are the problem.
This is the reason that religion
is, in my opinion, on the whole a negative force in the world. In spite
of the charity and empathy it may generate among many, because it
asserts as true notions that clearly are incompatible with the evidence
of reality, it inevitably engenders actions that are irrational. These
range from the innocuous to the deadly.
Science has taught us to revel in
the idea that we do not understand all there is to know, that cherished
notions may in fact be wrong. It teaches us that claiming to know the
answers to questions before they have even been asked or explored is
folly.
Some have argued that because
ridiculing sacred notions is offensive to believers, it is inappropriate
for such ridicule to be carried out in the public sphere. However, we choose
whether to be offended. An appropriate response is not to condemn the
offender but rather to generate intelligent arguments that demonstrate
they are wrong. If we shy away from such dialogue for fear of offense,
we will never allow those who are offended the opportunity to examine
and defend their beliefs. If we shy away from dialogue for fear of
reprisal by those who would rather their children not learn about the
world out of fear that knowledge will undermine their faith, we have
given in to ignorance and repression. That should offend us all.
Long live Charlie Hebdo. Long live ridicule. Long live satire. Our culture and our world are the better for them.
name and password.
If you have never participated in the Great Backyard Bird Count or any
other Cornell Lab citizen-science project, you’ll need to create a new account.
If you already created an account for last year’s GBBC, or if you’re
already registered with eBird or another Cornell Lab citizen-science
project, you can use your existing login
