Knowledge and Faith

Dispelling Fear through Righteous, Reasoned Inquiry

by Darin Hammond Darin L. Hammond (b. 1971) studied English at Ricks College, BYU, and Idaho State University. His academic interests include American studies, composition, psycho-linguistics, and cognitive science. In addition to fiction, he enjoys works popularizing science and philosophy from authors like Stephen Gould, Stephen Pinker, and David Foster Wallace. He loves reading and engaging in outdoor activities with his wife, Emily, and their four children. Knowledge and Faith: Dispelling Fear through Righteous, Reasoned Inquiry was written in 2009 for this anthology.

or much of my life, secular knowledge frightened me. Though never explicitly taught in my LDS family and culture, I perceived an inherent conflict between reason and religion. The threat seemed to be that an open mind in science, politics, and academics would lead to pride and apostasy. I felt that my faith must be fragile. At the margin of my cultural view, I excluded the non-members, cultures, and religions that I perceived as threatening, and as a consequence, I rejected volumes of experience, without any consideration of what might be gained. In reality my testimony was strong, and I had not realized that Heavenly Father wants us to reason our own opinions using our unique minds, under the influence of the spirit. So, in fearing unfamiliar subjects, I merely embraced the fears and insecurities of other members of my community. I have learned since to embrace the charge from Heavenly Father to gain an education and discover knowledge in all of the earth through intense study, empirical observations, an open and inquisitive mind, and a flexible cognitive framework. These, after all, are skills our Father possesses in perfection. The prophet Brigham Young (1967) clarifies this, observing that It is hard to get the people to believe that God is a scientific character, that He lives by science or strict law . . . It is a most difficult thing to make the people believe that every art and science and all wisdom comes from Him, and that He is their Author (p. 302). Summary of Historical Account In history, great thinkers have frequently been forced to resist manipulation by religion. Galileo Galilei (1564-1642), the Italian genius, fought to justify his scientific discoveries to an ultraconservative religious culture. After revolutionizing the telescope, he employed empirical

Knowledge and Faith

120

observations to prove Copernicus conception of the solar system, with the earth revolving around the sun. This heliocentric (literally, the sun is the center) view of the solar system opposed the geocentric (the earth is the center) model traditionally taught by the church (Blackwell, 1998, p. 32). The people of the church had merged scientific speculations with religious doctrine using literal, and false, interpretations of a few scriptures in the Bible (Blackwell, 1998, p. 32). If we follow the reasoning that led the religion to feel threatened by rational explanations of the world, the logic looks like this: The only true model of the solar stem is heliocentric (Galileos truth). The religious model of the solar system is geocentric (religious tradition). Therefore, the religious model of the solar system is not true.

Next in this logical sequence would be the conclusion that the religion must be false. In retrospect, we can easily see the facts because we have been taught Galileos truth since elementary school. When we critique history and other cultures, ignorance is often easy to detect, though shortcomings in our own culture are elusive, repressed. Galileo endured two legal (and religious) battles. The first in 1616 proclaimed the heliocentric solar system heretical and denounced the public espousal of the idea as unlawful. Wisely, Galileo held his tongue on the subject for the next 17 years. However, in 1632 he published his famous Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems (Blackwell, 1998, pp. 32, 35) where he argued again for the new model. The publication of the book led to his arrest, and the second trial in 1633 decreed a personal judgment about Galileos loyalty and obedience (p. 36), finding him guilty of heresy and in defiance of the 1616 ruling. The church was corneredallowing Galileo voice would expose religious error. Galileo exhibited courage in the face of cultural opposition. Analysis of Assumptions The conflicts origin in this story is not immediately intuitive. At first we might conclude that choosing the wrong model for the church created the problem, but the real error lies in the churchs act of appropriation in making science doctrine in the first place, a practice that the LDS church avoids. In other words, a crisis became inevitable when religion closed the door on empirical inquiry by pronouncing a scientific hypothesis to be doctrine. In the sciences, hypotheses are repeatedly tested and deemed accurate only so long as results reinforce veracity of the claim; hypotheses proven false can be easily discarded or replaced with new knowledge. This method of forming knowledge is distinct from the method of establishing doctrine. Fixing the doctrine label on the geocentric solar system fossilized the hypothesis, short circuiting the scientific method and making a future conflict with science inevitable. Active Reading: Applying a Text to Our Own Culture This piece of history becomes meaningful when we contextualize it in our own education. We study science, politics, and philosophy because The glory of God is intelligence . . . light and truth (Doctrine and Covenants 93:36). However, we must avoid the tendency, revealed in Galileos community, to adhere blindly to traditions that might hold us back from discovery of virtuous knowledge acquired by seek[ing] after these things (Articles of Faith 1:13).

Knowledge and Faith

121

Instead, we should feel the freedom to learn and explore at the university so that we might uncover light wherever it might be, recognizing our incomplete understanding of Gods creations. When we employ our academic critical thinking skills, while remaining close to the spirit in our personal lives, we incorporate new light into our cognitive framework with confidence. Heavenly Father has told us to seek, which will often force an adaptation of our cultural traditions, but church doctrine remains unaffected. This cognitive flexibility requires both intellectual and spiritual courage as modeled by Galileo. Active Reading: Using Additional Sources to Apply Knowledge For me, no one has shown this flexibility better than President Eyrings father, the famous scientist, educator, author, and church member. Henry Eyring (1901-1981) was an incredible man known worldwide as both a great man of science and religion. His accomplishments are impressive, including scientific awards, publications, and credit for developing the Absolute Rate Theory in chemistrywhich won him the National Medal of Science in 1966, The Wolf Prize in Chemistry 1980, and many, both outside and inside the church, believed should have earned him the Nobel Prize as well (Eyring, 2007, pp. xi-xii). He discussed science with legendary thinkers such as Albert Einstein and Niels Bohr. Henry Eyrings writing and example continue to guide my own pursuit of knowledge. On many occasions, Apostles and the First Presidency asked Henry Eyring to act as a spokesman for science and faith, clarifying the LDS enlightened view of science for the world. In this role, he even created a television program for CBS that aired nationwide (Eyring, 2007, p. xii). In reporting on one of several scientific conferences he attended at their request, Henry Eyring told the Brethren that To be understood, the Lord must reveal Himself in a language His Children can understand. Of necessity, many things not necessary for their immediate progress are omitted, to be revealed later, and to be discovered by mans own enterprise. There are some people who throw away the scriptures and restrict themselves to science and related fields. Others use the scriptures to the exclusion of other truth. Both are wrong. Latter-day Saints should seek after truth by all avenues with earnest humility. There is, of course, no conflict in the gospel since it embraces all truth. Undoubtedly, however, science is continually challenging us to think through again our conceptions of the gospel [italics added]. (Eyring, 2007, p. 59) Henry Eyrings argument is credible because of his scientific achievements and his powerful testimony of the gospel. He openly advocated controversial ideas in Christianity such as an extremely old age of the earth, human evolution, and the need for non-literal interpretations of the bible and scripture. Apostles and Prophets such as President David O. McKay, Stephen L. Richards, Mark E. Petersen, and J. Reuben Clark sought his counsel on reason and faith, science and religion (Heath, 1982, pp. 87-99). He responded to many unique assignments including teaching the youth about scientific and gospel truths. As he taught, he eased the fears of members about issues that had often enflamed and divided other religions. The strongest support for Henry Eyring is that the Lord concurs with an embracing attitude toward secular knowledge and science. Eyring often quoted a passage in Doctrine and Covenants 88, where the Lord encourages us to include in our education

Knowledge and Faith

122

things both in heaven and in the earth, and under the earth; things which have been, things which are, things which must shortly come to pass; things which are at home, things which are abroad; the wars and the perplexities of the nations, and the judgments which are on the land; and a knowledge also of countries and of kingdoms (78, 79) The Lord describes an open-ended and lifelong education. Eyring also supported his position using the powerful words of latter-day prophets, including Brigham Young (1967) who said that in embracing science, we differ from the Christian world, for our religion will not clash with or contradict the facts of science in any particular (p. 116). Years after President Young, Elder James E. Talmage (1931), a member of the Quorum of the Twelve and author of Jesus the Christ and The Articles of Faith, commented more specifically on intellectual freedom in an address delivered in the Salt Lake Tabernacle, stating Genesis, and scriptures related thereto, were never intended as a textbook of geology, archaeology, earthscience or man-science. . . . We do not show reverence for the scriptures when we misapply them through faulty interpretation (n.p.). The text of this discourse, Earth and Man, was printed in the November 1931 Deseret News, as well as in a separate church pamphlet at about the same time . . . Then, in December 1965 and January 1966, it was printed as a two-part article in the Instructor (Ash, 2002, p. 25). With this position in mind, we include, in Foundations English 201, challenging intellectual works from brilliant authors who will push and perhaps resist your worldview, writers such as Charles Darwin, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Thomas Huxley, Stephen Jay Gould, and President Barrack Obama. Initially, cultural traditions and opinions might, mistakenly, make you feel uncomfortable and tempt you to immediately reject writing that is unfamiliar. Frequently, this bit of emotional discomfort is experienced as our intellectual muscles are stretched by new viewpoints. However, if you will allow them, these thinkers will inspire you intellectually and spiritually as you summarize, analyze, criticize, and discuss their ideas, and with the spirit about you, controversial ideas that you once dismissed as false can positively impact your thinking, about yourself, science, politics, and community. They will even catalyze a fuller understanding of gospel principles. Henry Eyring calms potential fears of losing faith, saying: The assumption that because a man understands something about the operation of the Universe, he will necessarily be less faithful is a gratuitous assumption contradicted by numberless examples. God who understands all about the Universe, is apparently, not troubled by this knowledge. Some people drift when they study, but some people drift when they dont study. If the Church espouses the cause of ignorance, it will alienate more people than if it advises man to seek after truth, even at some risk. (Heath, 1982, p. 98) Eyring and others illustrate that my fear of secular education was unfounded, and while there may be some risk in seeking knowledge, the divine benefits outweigh the risks. Intelligence will make you wiser, happier, and more like your Heavenly Father, qualities that rise with you in the end to meet Him, leaving behind a trail of trivia that might have otherwise dominated your lifecell phones with years of talking and texting invested; flat screens with decades of family time wasted; lap tops with tomes of wikis, tweets, googles, and images vainly recorded in hard drives; and HD movies with eons of gazes and slacked jaws

Knowledge and Faith

123

frozen in time. The Lord declares that if a person gains more knowledge and intelligence in this life through his diligence and obedience than another, he will have so much the advantage in the world to come (Doctrine and Covenants 130: 18, 19). The intelligence the Lord describes here will also be an advantage to you in the present as you become an informed, active member of the world community. References Ash, M. R. (2002). The Mormon myth of evil evolution. Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, 35(4), 19-38. Blackwell, R. J. (1998). Science, religion and authority : Lessons from the Galileo affair. Milwaukee, WI: Marquette University Press. Eyring, H. J. (2007). Mormon scientist: The life and faith of Henry Eyring. Salt Lake, UT: Deseret Book. Heath, S. H. (1982). The reconciliation of faith and science, Henry Eyring's achievement. Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought, 15(3), 87-99. Talmage, J.E. (1931). The earth and man. Address presented in the Salt Lake Tabernacle, Salt Lake, UT. Young, B. (1967). In Watt G. D. (Ed.), Journal of discourses (Vols. 13-14). Salt Lake, UT: Brigham Young University. (Original work published 1854).