From "The Universe in a Single Atom"

[XXChristabelXX]

I just started (as in the last 15 minutes) this book- "The Universe in a Single Atom" by HH the Dalai Lama- barely to page 13 and many things have struck me, nothing too relevatory, but more in a "if I had taken 7 more seconds to think, I would have known that instead of reading it and agreeing silently" way. But a notion by HH that struck me was as follows-

"I have noticed that many people hold an assumption that the scientific view of the world should be the basis for all knowledge and all that is knowable. This is scientific materialism.

... not to argue against this reductionist position, but to draw attention to a vitally important point; that these ideas do not constitute acientific knowledge; rather they represent a philosophical, in fact a metaphysical, position... that all aspects of reality can be reduced to matter and its various particles...

There is more to human existence and to reality than current science can ever give us access to. By the same token, spirituality must be tempered by the insights and discoveries of science. If as spiritual practitioners we ignore th ediscoveries of science, our practice is also impoverished, and this mindset can lead to fundamentalism."

[Drake Dun]

His description of the scientific mindset is right (or close enough) the first time, wrong the second time.

The first time:

...the scientific view of the world should be the basis for all knowledge and all that is knowable...

The second time:

...all aspects of reality can be reduced to matter and its various particles...

It looks like he's conflating the two. If so, he's criticizing a paradigm he doesn't understand.

There is more to human existence and to reality than current science can ever give us access to.

That's a pretty grand claim. Does he give some reason why we should take it seriously?

[JCC]

Originally Posted by Drake Dun

That's a pretty grand claim. Does he give some reason why we should take it seriously?

Has a religion ever?

[Wormboy]

Originally Posted by JCC

Has a religion ever?

touché fuckingpostlength

[LaBelleDameSansMerci]

*puts on big voice* Never Question The Dalai Lama. :P

Seriously, though. I agree with him. Not everyone reduces things to their smallest particles, but most of the sciences do, I think. They always try to get more and more precise. It's curiosity, which I don't think is a bad thing, but we can't forget the bigger picture. Psychology is reduced down to neurons and their transmitters, but what use is that if we don't know about the parts of the brain, or the nervous system as a whole? What's the point of studying of cells if we ignore their groupings into organs? Or atoms into their substances?

There are some people who believe that science is everything, though...

Drake Dun, he said "current science," so if science changes a hell of a lot, it might be able to explain everything.
As it is, the arts, such as literature and Fine Art and drama aren't very well-explained by science. Then again, they might be, and I'm just not aware.